Submission #251
To: Policy Department – Attention: Policy and Monitoring Department
Whangarei District Council Private Bag 9023 Whangarei 0148 Email: [email protected]
RE: Submission on Plan Change 82A, 82B, 88, 88A-J, 109, 115, 136, 147, 148
1. Details of persons making submission
Advance Developments Ltd Ref: 15144.blh C/- Reyburn and Bryant Attention: Brett Hood PO Box 191 WHANGAREI
2. General statement
ADL cannot gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission. They are directly affected by the plan change. The effects are not related to trade competition.
3. Background and context
ADL owns land on the corner of McCathie Road and SH15 at Ruakaka. The land is held in five titles with a combined area of 41.5538ha. The land is currently zoned Rural Production Environment (RPE). A plan showing the location of the property is provided in Figure 1 below.
The land is shown as ‘Light Industry’ in the Marsden Point Structure Plan (2008).
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Figure 1: Location (Source: Quickmap)
4. The specific provisions of the Plan Change that this submission relates to are:
1. All the plan changes, but particularly:
. PC88 ‘Urban Plan Changes Technical Introduction’ . PC88E ‘Light Industry Zone’ . PC88J ‘Precincts’ . PC148 ‘Strategic Direction and Subdivision’
2. Proposed Planning Map 44.
3. The submission also relates to the consequential amendments to the Operative District Plan text, including the definitions.
5. ADL seeks the following amendments/relief:
. That the ADL land be zoned ‘Light Industrial’ with a Marsden Technology Park Precinct overlay (MTPP), or alternative relief with similar effect.
. Relief from compliance with (or amendment to) provisions in Plan Changes 82A, 82B, 88, 88A-J, 109, 115, 136, 147, 148 where those provisions are inconsistent with the objectives, policies, and rules intended for the MTPP.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
6. The reasons for the proposed relief are:
1. The MTPP will have positive economic effects for the district and region.
2. The MTPP is capable of being serviced by existing reticulated and roading infrastructure.
3. The proposed MTPP better achieves the purpose of the RMA relative to retaining the proposed Rural Production Zone or rezoning the land LI without a precinct overlay.
4. The proposed MTPP provisions are more efficient and effective than the default LC provisions in the context of Section 32 of the RMA.
7. ADL wish the Whangarei District Council’s decision to address the above issues by:
. Rezoning the ADL land ‘Light Industrial’ with a Marsden Technology Park Precinct overlay (MTPP), or alternative relief with similar effect.
8. ADL wish to be heard in support of their submission at a hearing.
______Brett Hood Planning Consultant On behalf of Advance Developments Ltd
Dated this 3rd day of July 2019.
Attachment: 1. Draft MTPP provisions. 2. Section 32 Evaluation Report.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Submission to PC88 to the Whangarei District Plan
ADVANCE DEVELOPMENTS LTD Cnr McCathie Road and SH15A, Ruakaka
Submission to PC88 to the Whangarei District Plan ADVANCE DEVELOPMENTS LTD Cnr McCathie Road & SH15A, Ruakaka
Report prepared for: Advance Developments Ltd Author Brett Hood, Planning Manager/Director Reviewed by: Emma Miller, Senior Planner/Associate District Authority: Whangarei District Council Report reference: 15144 Report Status: Final Date: July 2019
© Reyburn and Bryant Limited This document and its contents are the property of Reyburn and Bryant Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction, in full or in part, is forbidden
Reyburn and Bryant P.O. Box 191 Whangarei 0140 Telephone: (09) 438 3563 Fax: (09) 438 0251
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Report Basis 1 1.2 Purpose of the Plan Change 1 1.3 The site and surrounding environment 1
2. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS 6 2.1 Plan Change Framework 6 2.2 Section 32 6 2.3 Section 74 RMA 7 2.4 Section 75 8
3. THE MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PRECINCT 10 3.1 Rationale for site selection 10 3.2 MTCP Objectives, Policies, and Rules 10
4. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 12 4.1 Economic effects 12 4.2 Landscape and visual effects 12 4.3 Noise 13 4.4 Engineering Suitability 16 4.5 Traffic effects 17 4.6 Natural Hazards 17 4.7 Archaeological effects 18 4.8 Cultural effects 18
5. POLICY FRAMEWORK AND DIRECTION 19 5.1 Relevant National Policy Statements 19 5.2 National Planning Standards (April 2019) 20 5.3 Regional Policy Statement for Northland 22 5.4 Plan Change 148 ‘Strategic Direction’ 23
6. SECTION 32 EVALUATION 26 6.1 Schedule 1 and Section 32 RMA 26 6.2 Appropriateness of objectives to achieve the purpose of the RMA 26 6.3 Appropriateness of provisions to achieve the objectives 29
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Subject site (Source: Quickmap) 2 Figure 2: SH15A Road frontage (Source: Google Streetview) 2 Figure 3: McCathie Road frontage (Source: Google Streetview) 3 Figure 4: Reticulated services in the vicinity of the ADL site (Source: Quickmap) 3 Figure 5: Flood susceptible area (blue hatch) (Source: WDC GIS) 4 Figure 6: Tsunami Evacuation Zone (coloured yellow) (Source: WDC GIS) 4 Figure 7: PC88 District Plan zones in the surrounding environment (Pink is LI, orange is MPC) (Source: PC88) 5 Figure 8: Light Industrial land in the Marsden Point Area (Source: PC88) 10 Figure 9: Assumed Data Centre Location for noise assessment 14 Figure 10: RPS Policy 5.1.1 Planned and co-ordinated development 23 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: MTPP Objectives 27 Table 2: Comparison of objectives 29 Table 3: Options assessment - MTPP policies v LI equivalent policies 31 Table 4: Options assessment - MTPP rules v equivalent LI rules 35 Table 5: Efficiency and effectiveness 37
ATTACHMENTS
1. RS Eng Site suitability report 2. MTPP Provisions 3. Urban Economics report 4. Simon Cocker Landscape Architecture report 5. Marshall Day noise report 6. Engineering Outcomes traffic report
ABBREVIATIONS
EES Environmental Engineering Standards EO Engineering Outcomes LI Local Industry MTPP Marsden Technology Park Precinct MD Marshall Day NES National Environmental Standard
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
NPS National Planning Standard NZTA New Zealand Transport Agency PC88 Plan Change 88 RMA Resource Management Act, 1991 RPE Rural Production Environment RS RS Eng Limited SCLA Simon Cocker Landscape Architecture SD Strategic Direction Chapter SH15A State Highway 15A UE Urban Economics WDC Whangarei District Council WDP Whangarei District Plan
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Report Basis
This report is in support of a submission to PC88 to change the zone of the ADL land on the corner of McCathie Road and SH15A to ‘Light Industrial’ with a precinct overlay entitled ‘Marsden Technology Park Precinct’ (MTPP) (or similar).
This report contains the following information:
. A description of the site and the surrounding environment. . An outline of relevant statutory requirements. . A description of the MTPP zone and the draft provisions (objectives, policies and rules). . An assessment of environmental effects. . An assessment against relevant planning documents. . An evaluation under Section 32 of the RMA, 1991.
1.2 Purpose of the Plan Change
The purpose of the Plan Change is to create a work and play zone, where a range of digital, technology, innovation and research-based activities are enabled along with supporting amenities to enhance the work environment. These supporting amenities include childcare facilities, healthcare facilities, cafes, dairies, and recreational facilities.
The proposed MTPP is located take advantage of the proximity of the Hawaiki fibre optic cable linking Australia, New Zealand, American Samoa, Hawaii and the US West Coast. The cable has brought greater digital connectivity, diversity, capacity and security to New Zealand and offers many service benefits for telecommunications companies, Internet Service Providers, Cloud service providers and others. The MTPP is designed to enable these, and a range of other innovation and research-based activities.
1.3 The site and surrounding environment
Location
The site is located on the corner of McCathie Road and SH15A. The site contains 41.5538 ha and is legally described as Section 13 SO322547, Lot 2 DP 348043, Lot 1 DP 386730, Lot 1 DP 348043, and Lot 2 DP 325771 (see Figure 1 below).
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 1
Figure 1: Subject site (Source: Quickmap)
Buildings/structures
There are no buildings or structures on the property.
Vegetation
The property is in pasture. There is no indigenous vegetation.
Roading infrastructure
The site has approximately 1.4km of frontage to SH15A, and 770 m of frontage to McCathie Road. The site frontages are shown in the photographs below.
Figure 2: SH15A Road frontage (Source: Google Streetview)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 2
Figure 3: McCathie Road frontage (Source: Google Streetview)
Water, sewer, stormwater
There are reticulated services located adjacent to the ADL land (see Figure 4 below).
ADL land
Figure 4: Reticulated services in the vicinity of the ADL site (Source: Quickmap)
General Site Suitability
A general site suitability report has been prepared by RS. A copy of the report is attached.
Natural Hazards
The site is not shown as flood susceptible on the District Plan Resource Area maps (see Figure 5 below). It is located in a Tsunami Evacuation area (see Figure 6 below).
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 3
Figure 5: Flood susceptible area (blue hatch) (Source: WDC GIS)
Figure 6: Tsunami Evacuation Zone (coloured yellow) (Source: WDC GIS)
Existing and proposed District Plan zoning
The site is currently zoned ‘Rural Production Environment’ (RPE) in the Operative WDP. It is proposed to remain zoned RPE under PC 88.
Surrounding environment
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 4
The ADL land adjoins RPE land to the south and south-east, Business 2/Light Industrial land to the north-east, and it is adjacent to the Marsden Primary Centre on the opposite side of SH15A. The surrounding zones are shown in Figure 7 below.
Figure 7: PC88 District Plan zones in the surrounding environment (Pink is LI, orange is MPC) (Source: PC88)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 5
2. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Plan Change Framework
Section 74 of the RMA contains matters that must be considered by a territorial authority when preparing and changing its District Plan.
74 Matters to be considered by territorial authority A territorial authority must prepare and change its district plan in accordance with— (a) its functions under section 31; and (b) the provisions of Part 2; and (c) a direction given under section 25A(2); and (d) its obligation (if any) to prepare an evaluation report in accordance with section 32; and (e) its obligation to have particular regard to an evaluation report prepared in accordance with section 32; and (ea) a national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, and a national planning standard; and (f) any regulations.
Section 74 requires inter alia an evaluation under Section 32 of the Act. Central to the evaluation is the extent to which the proposed MTCP is appropriate in achieving the purpose of the Act.
The WDC has completed a Section 32 evaluation for PC 88. Any change to the mix of zones and provisions requires further evaluation under Section 32AA(1)(a) of the RMA.
2.2 Section 32
An evaluation under Section 32 and further evaluation under 32AA must:
. Examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal are appropriate in achieving the purpose of the RMA (Section 5). . Identify other reasonably practicable options to achieve the objectives. . Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed provisions in achieving the objectives.
Section 32(2) requires that this assessment must:
. Identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects (including economic growth and employment). . Assess the risk of acting or not acting.
An evaluation under Section 32 (which can be used to support the Section 32AA report) is included in Section 7 of this report.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 6
2.3 Section 74 RMA
Section 74 of the Act sets out the requirements for territorial authorities when considering changes to a District Plan, and the matters that it should have regard to.
74 Matters to be considered by territorial authority (1) A territorial authority must prepare and change its district plan in accordance with— (a) its functions under section 31; and (b) the provisions of Part 2; and (c)a direction given under section 25A(2); and (d) its obligation (if any) to prepare an evaluation report in accordance with section 32; and (e) its obligation to have particular regard to an evaluation report prepared in accordance with section 32; and (ea) a national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, and a national planning standard; and (f) any regulations. (2) In addition to the requirements of section 75(3) and (4), when preparing or changing a district plan, a territorial authority shall have regard to— (a) any— (i) proposed regional policy statement; or (ii) proposed regional plan of its region in regard to any matter of regional significance or for which the regional council has primary responsibility under Part 4; and (b) any— (i) management plans and strategies prepared under other Acts; and (ii) [Repealed] (iia) relevant entry on the New Zealand Heritage List/Rārangi Kōrero required by the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014; and (iii) regulations relating to ensuring sustainability, or the conservation, management, or sustainability of fisheries resources (including regulations or bylaws relating to taiapure, mahinga mataitai, or other non-commercial Maori customary fishing), — to the extent that their content has a bearing on resource management issues of the district; and (c) the extent to which the district plan needs to be consistent with the plans or proposed plans of adjacent territorial authorities. (2A) A territorial authority, when preparing or changing a district plan, must take into account any relevant planning document recognised by an iwi authority and lodged with the territorial authority, to the extent that its content has a bearing on the resource management issues of the district. (3) In preparing or changing any district plan, a territorial authority must not have regard to trade competition or the effects of trade competition.
In summary, Section 74 reinforces the need for District Plan provisions to accord with Part 2 of the Act, and to prepare and have regard to an evaluation
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 7
under Section 32. It also requires regard to be had to a range of national and regional documents, heritage items, and any iwi management plans.
In the case of the MTPP, the following matters/documents are relevant under Section 74:
. Part 2 RMA . Section 32 Evaluation . National Planning Standards . Regional Policy Statement . Strategic planning direction in the District Plan.
Note: There are no relevant entries on the NZ Heritage list, or relevant matters of regional significance for which the Regional Council has primary responsibility.
2.4 Section 75
Section 75 of the Act sets out the contents of District Plans.
75 Contents of district plans (1) A district plan must state— (a) the objectives for the district; and (b) the policies to implement the objectives; and (c) the rules (if any) to implement the policies. (2) A district plan may state— (a) the significant resource management issues for the district; and (b) the methods, other than rules, for implementing the policies for the district; and (c)the principal reasons for adopting the policies and methods; and (d) the environmental results expected from the policies and methods; and (e) the procedures for monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of the policies and methods; and (f) the processes for dealing with issues that cross territorial authority boundaries; and (g) the information to be included with an application for a resource consent; and (h) any other information required for the purpose of the territorial authority’s functions, powers, and duties under this Act. (3) A district plan must give effect to— (a) any national policy statement; and (b) any New Zealand coastal policy statement; and (ba) a national planning standard; and (c)any regional policy statement. (4) A district plan must not be inconsistent with— (a) a water conservation order; or (b) a regional plan for any matter specified in section 30(1). (5) A district plan may incorporate material by reference under Part 3 of Schedule 1.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 8
Of specific relevance to the proposed MTPP plan change is s75(3) which requires the plan change to “give effect to” the following relevant documents:
. National Policy Statement on Urban Capacity (2016). . National Planning Standards (2019). . The Regional Policy Statement for Northland (2016).
Note 1: There are no relevant Water Conservation Orders. Note 2: The proposed MTPP plan change has been formatted according to the National Planning Standards. Note 3: No documents are being incorporated by reference.
These documents are considered in the context of the proposed MTPP in Section 5 of this report.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 9
3. THE MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PRECINCT
3.1 Rationale for site selection
The ADL land was chosen for the MTPP for the following reasons:
(1) It is in close proximity to the Hawaiiki cable at Mangawhai.
(2) It is capable of being made hazard free which is an important requisite for the security of data centres.
(3) There is a significant power source (transmission lines) in close proximity to the site which is an important requisite for data centres.
(3) There is limited available light industrial land in Marsden Point, with much of it owned by Marsden Maritime Holdings Ltd who do not subdivide or sell land, and the remainder currently being either mined for sand or used for timber processing (see Figure 8 below).
MMH
HERMPAC
SAND MINE
Figure 8: Light Industrial land in the Marsden Point Area (Source: PC88)
For the reasons outlined above, the site is considered to have a strategic advantage over other sites in the district, and outside the northland region.
3.2 MTCP Objectives, Policies, and Rules
This submission seeks that the subject site be zoned LI, but with specific objectives, policies and rules tailored to fit the characteristics of the site. Under the National Planning Standards (discussed under Section 5 of this report), the
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 10
required amendments are most appropriately facilitated through the introduction of a precinct.
A copy of the proposed MTPP provisions is attached.
The MTPP provisions are evaluated under Section 32 of the Act in Section 6 of this report.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 11
4. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
4.1 Economic effects
Economic effects have been assessed by Urban Economics (UE). A copy of the UE report is attached.
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
. The proposed MTPP is predicted to generate significant economic impacts, including a $48 million annual economic benefit to the Whangarei economy.
. The proposed MTPP is predicted to generate 800 new jobs.
. The proposed MTPP is predicted to result in an initial construction impact of $180 million, a large share of which is expected to be retained in the Whangarei District.
. There are limited opportunities in Marsden Point (due to land tenure and other existing uses) for a development of this nature. The site also has a competitive advantage over other districts and regions due to its proximity to the Hawaiiki cable.
. The proposal is not expected to displace other business activity from other zoned industrial and commercial land due to the specific nature of the intended uses.
. The site will contribute to growth related infrastructure costs through development contributions and rates.
4.2 Landscape and visual effects
Landscape and visual effects have been assessed by Simon Cocker Landscape Architecture (SCLA). A copy of the SCLA report is attached. This assessment has informed many of the proposed MTPP rules.
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
. Development principles, and ultimately a structure plan has informed many of the MTPP provisions.
. A height restriction is proposed where buildings have the potential to create adverse effects on adjoining rural-residential properties.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 12
. Roadside and boundary planting is proposed to mitigate adverse visual and landscape effects.
. Internal landscaping adjacent to future private and/or public roads is proposed to achieve a high level of internal amenity.
. Potential adverse landscape effects are expected to be high relative to retaining the land in a pastoral state.
. Transitory visual effects on road users are predicted to be low.
. Views from the adjoining Lot 1 DP 325771 are expected to result in high adverse visual effects relative to retaining the land in a pastoral state.
. Views from the adjoining Lot 2 DP 146672 are expected to result in high adverse visual effects relative to retaining the land in a pastoral state.
. Views from the adjoining Lot 5 DP 146672 are expected to result in low adverse effects due to existing screening.
. Views from the clustered of dwellings within Lot 2 and 3 DP 308942 and Lot 1 DP 67804 are expected to result in low adverse effects.
. Views from the east and north-east of the site are expected to result in low adverse visual effects
4.3 Noise
The potential noise effects of a data centre (the noisiest potential activity in MTPP) have been assessed by Marshall Day (MD). A copy of the MD report is attached.
The MD assessment was based on a data centre being located in the southern part of the site near existing residential units (see plan in Figure 9 below).
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 13
Figure 9: Assumed Data Centre Location for noise assessment
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
. Potential sources of noise within the MTPP are identified as:
- Emergency generators (data centre)
- Cooling plant (data centre)
- Ventilation fans and ancillary plant (data centre)
- Traffic
. Night-time background and ambient noise levels at this site are not significantly elevated. The existing ambient and background noise levels do not support an increase in the noise limit for this site as part of a private plan change.
. An analysis of noise from a scenario with eight large chillers operating with
a total sound power level of 99 dB LWA suggests that there is appreciable
risk that the night-time noise limit of 40 dB Laeq would be exceeded. To comply with the noise limit would require noise control bunds, selection of quiet cooling plant and engineering control of generator noise emissions.
. The following design solution is likely to result in the lowest overall level of noise emission from the site. It is recommended that this form the design of the data centre mechanical plant, if practicable:
- Chiller plant (or similar) with a total sound power level of below 94 dB LWA. This could be perhaps be achieved by six quiet, non-tonal chillers operating each with a night-time sound power level of less than 86 dB
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 14
LWA each. This would represent well engineered chiller plant and care would need to be taken in the selection of the plant
- Chiller plant located at ground level.
- 3-metre high noise bunds around the site including overlaps around vehicle egress points.
- Plant layout to take advantage of acoustic screening provided by data centre buildings.
- Generators in masonry generator hall with well-designed ventilation paths (incorporating rectangular silencers) and generator exhaust silencers.
. It is expected that with the above solutions in place, noise emissions from the site could be below 40 dB Laeq with a small factor of safety. This would comply with the existing Whangarei District Plan zone provisions.
. It is considered that whilst the inclusion of extensive acoustic measures could make a proposed data centre compliant; the location is likely to have an impact of the acceptable size of the centre and is likely to prevent further expansion for the centre in the future as the initial facility is predicted to be only just compliant (leaving little “budget” for future activity).
. Moving the data centre to the north of the site would result in lower overall noise emissions to the more sensitive rural production area. Doubling the distance between the data centre plant and the existing dwellings may reduce noise levels by around 8 decibels if there is sufficient soft ground between the site and surrounding dwellings. This would have the following benefits:
- Compliance could possibly be achieved without the use of such high bunds
- Other forms of cooling plant (e.g. PAC units) may be able to be used on the site with noise barriers in place.
Based on the MD assessment, it is likely that a data centre(s) may need to be located in the northern part of the site, although that will depend on equipment and noise attenuation measures assessed at the time of applying for building and/or resource consent.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 15
No changes are proposed to the NAV provisions of the District Plan, meaning that noise emanating from the MTPP will continue to be managed by the provisions in the NAV chapter.
4.4 Engineering Suitability
General engineering suitability has been assessed by Richardson Stevens (RS). A copy of the RS report is attached.
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
Wastewater
. The MTPP estimated sanitary sewer flows is 13.7 l/s.
. The Whangarei District Council has advised that planned capital improvement works will increase the capacity of the Ruakaka Sewer Treatment Plant such that it can cater for the additional flows from the MTPP development.
. It is likely that a new connection to the Ruakaka Sewer Treatment Plant will be required which will involve the construction of the new reticulation network discharge to a single pump station with the new rising main parallel to the existing Marsden City mains.
Water
. Estimated peak usage is 17.8 l/s.
. There are two existing WDC water mains on McCathie Road and another on SH15A.
. The WDC has advised that FW5 (firefighting) service is available to the property.
Stormwater
. Future stormwater discharges from the MTPP should be designed to mitigate any adverse effects on neighbouring properties.
. Future development will require stormwater attenuation to ensure that the effects of increased run off downstream are less than minor.
. The southern part of the property lends itself to a communal stormwater attenuation pond construction of the subdivision consent stage.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 16
. The northern part of the site is better suited for site specific stormwater attenuation constructed at the building consent stage.
4.5 Traffic effects
Traffic effects have been assessed by Engineering Outcomes (EO). A copy of the EO report is attached.
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
. The additional traffic enabled by the proposed MTPP on the existing road network will slightly bring forward the time at which regular congestion begins to be experienced at the key pressure point – the Port Marsden Highway (SH15A)/McCathie Road intersection. However, this effect will be minimal, with congestion expected to be experienced within 11 years (by the year 2030), compared with only 12 years (by year 2031) without the MTPP.
. The traffic through the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection will be dominated by expected development of the nearby Marsden City and other activity and development. The proposal is expected to generate less than 4% of the traffic through the intersection by year 2030.
. A left-turn taper might be required at the Marsden Point Road/McCathie Road intersection as a result of development enabled by the proposal, but that is already warranted, and a complying taper can be constructed entirely within road reserve.
. It would also be desirable to address a minor sight distance issue – the complying sightline from the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection, towards the northeast, while clear, crosses part of the site. This would be addressed either with a suitable covenant over the land between the sightline and existing boundary or its vesting as road.
. Overall, traffic effects should not be an impediment to the proposed MTPP.
. The mix of activities enabled in the MTPP reduces the number of trips required for ancillary activities, ultimately benefitting the wider roading network.
4.6 Natural Hazards
Natural hazards have been assessed by Richardson Stevens (RS). A copy of the RS report is attached.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 17
Key conclusions/recommendations are as follows:
. Acid sulphate soils are present in the western part of the site. Provision will need to be made to ensure future development adequately allows for these soils and the risks they present, with specific testing and design required on a project specific basis.
. This property is generally underlain by a shallow depth of peaty soils overlying sandstone at a varying depth. This terrain is common throughout the One Tree Point / Ruakaka area. The peaty soils do not suitable to provide an adequate foundation for structures. It is common practice to undercut these soils and replace them with compacted engineered fill or use piling to transfer building loads to the underlying sandstone. The property is generally considered suitable for commercial and industrial building development. However, specific geotechnical investigation and assessment is recommended specific to each proposal to ensure adequate recommendations are applied.
. The property is not subject to the 1% AEP Coastal Flood Hazard.
. A small part of the north-eastern part of the property is subject to the 1% AEP River Flood Hazard.
. Non-habitable building is should achieve a minimum floor level of RL 5.5 m.
. Overland flow paths should be identified and defined to avoid adverse effects.
. Future drainage or earthworks should be designed to ensure that overland flows are not concentrated and/or adversely affect neighbouring properties.
. Part of the site is located in a Tsunami Evacuation Zone. The effects of tsunami can be mitigated by raising the ground level or constructing a bund around the perimeter of the site to RL 9.65 m.
4.7 Archaeological effects
There are no recorded archaeological sites on the property.
4.8 Cultural effects
ADL is committed to ongoing consultation with Patuharakeke.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 18
5. POLICY FRAMEWORK AND DIRECTION
5.1 Relevant National Policy Statements
There are currently five National Policy Statements in place being:
. National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity. . National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. . National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation. . National Policy Statement on Electricity Transmission. . New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement.
Of these, only the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity is of relevance to the proposed plan change.
The NPS:UDC requires local authorities that have high-growth or medium- growth areas within their district or region to produce a Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment on a 3-yearly basis. This assessment must consider (amongst other things) the demand for, and supply of, a range of housing and business land uses; market indicators; current planning provisions; and changes in demographics and population in order to estimate the development capacity feasibility for their area.
Local authorities are also required to set a level of feasible development capacity, establish minimum targets (which must be incorporated into the relevant Regional Policy Statement and regional and district plans must in turn give effect to those RPS provisions), and produce a Future Development Strategy which demonstrates and identifies the potential location, timing and sequencing of feasible development opportunities.
When considering the zoning of land, there are several objectives and policies in the NPS:UDC that are relevant. These can be broadly grouped into provisions that are enabling, and provisions that require the careful consideration of effects (including on the viability of other zones). These are as follows:
Enabling Provisions
OA1: Effective and efficient urban environments that enable people and communities and future generations to provide for their social, economic, cultural, and environmental well-being.
OA2: Urban environments that have sufficient opportunities for the development of housing and business land to meet demand, and which provide choices that will meet the needs of people and
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 19
communities and future generations for a range of dwelling types and locations, working environments and places to locate businesses.
OC1: Planning decisions, practices and methods that enable urban development which provides for the social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being of people and communities and future generations in the short, medium and long-term.
PA3(a): Providing for choices that will meet the needs of people and communities and future generations for a range of dwelling types and locations, working environments, and places to locate businesses.
PA4(a): When considering the effects of urban development, decision-makers shall take into account the (a) benefits that urban development will provide with respect to the ability for people and communities and future generations to provide for their social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being.
Assessment Provisions
PA3(c): Limiting as much as possible adverse impacts on the competitive operation of land and development markets.
PA4(b): When considering the effects of urban development, decision-makers shall take into account the (b) benefits and costs of urban development at a national, inter-regional, regional and District scale, as well as the local effects.
Assessment
It is understood that the Council has developed a model that assists in determining the appropriate mix of commercial, industrial, and residential zone land across the district in accordance with its obligations under the NPS. It is understood that the addition of the MTPP will not compromise the Council’s obligations under the NRS-UDC.
5.2 National Planning Standards (April 2019)
General
The first set of National Planning Standards (the ‘NPS’) was introduced in April
2019. The stated purpose of the standards is:
To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning system by providing nationally consistent: . Structure . Format . Definitions . Noise and vibration metrics . Electronic functionality and accessibility
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 20
for regional policy statements, regional plans, district plans and combined plans under the Resource Management Act 1991.1
Table 4 of the NPS sets out the District Plan structure, including the zone names that are to be standardised across the country.2 These zone names are also listed in Table 13.3
Other spatial tools in the NPS
Table 18 of the NPS sets out the spatial layers for district plans4. In addition to the standard “zones” in Table 13, Table 18 includes a range of other spatial tools. Of these, there are two additional zoning tools to control land use, being “Precincts” and “Development areas”. The NPS describes the function of these tools as follows:
Precinct
A precinct spatially identifies and manages an area where additional place-based provisions apply to modify or refine aspects of the policy approach or outcomes anticipated in the underlying zone(s).
Development area
A development area spatially identifies and manages areas where plans such as concept plans, structure plans, outline development plans, master plans or growth area plans apply to determine future land use or development. When the associated development is complete, the development areas spatial layer is generally removed from the plan either through a trigger in the development area provisions or at a later plan change.
The guidance document for the NES5 states that:
Precincts apply to a defined area where the description(s) of the underlying zone(s) and majority of provisions (especially objectives and policies) are still applicable and are relevant. A precinct introduces a collection of new provisions. Precincts are therefore dependent on the underlying zone(s) and their policy frameworks.6
1 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. National Planning Standards. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 5)
2 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. National Planning Standards. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 15) 3 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. National Planning Standards. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (Table 13, page 36) 4 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. National Planning Standards. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (Table 18, page 50)
5 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. Guidance for 12. District Spatial Layers Standard and 8. Zone Framework Standard Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 1) 6 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. Guidance for 12. District Spatial Layers Standard and 8. Zone Framework Standard Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 3)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 21
The document also states that:
Precincts could include detailed requirements for development such as the provision of infrastructure, or other requirements. An example of other requirements would be subdivision and ecological controls to provide an environmental baseline for growth, as long as these provisions are not time-bound or part of a high-level development plan for the area – that is a development area function.7
In regard to “development areas”, the guidance document states that:
A development area layer provides for variously named plans that seek to manage the effects and demands of development, or comprehensive redevelopment, of larger areas in an integrated, holistic and orderly way. Development areas may show the anticipated development framework that reflects the expected land-use patterns, areas of open space, layout and nature of infrastructure (including transportation links) and other main features in different levels of detail. Development area provisions may rely heavily on referenced documents (under Schedule 1 Part 3 of the RMA) to attach technical information and requirements to land use or subdivision consents.8
The guidance document also confirms that development areas may have an underlying zone:
A development plan may control most land uses, with the underlying zone playing a small role.9
5.3 Regional Policy Statement for Northland
General
The Regional Policy Statement for Northland (RPS) is limited in terms of the strategic direction that it provides for the spatial extent of urban zones across the region. The policy that is of most relevance is 5.1.1 ‘Planned and coordinated development’ (set out below).
7 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. Guidance for 12. District Spatial Layers Standard and 8. Zone Framework Standard Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 4)
8 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. Guidance for 12. District Spatial Layers Standard and 8. Zone Framework Standard Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 5) 9 Ministry for the Environment. 2019. Guidance for 12. District Spatial Layers Standard and 8. Zone Framework Standard Wellington: Ministry for the Environment (page 6)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 22
Figure 10: RPS Policy 5.1.1 Planned and co-ordinated development
Key components of this policy are:
. To avoid reverse sensitivity; . To enhance sense of place and the character of the surrounding environment; and . To ensure that the development can be serviced by necessary infrastructure.
Assessment
There is some potential for reverse sensitivity effects to arise given the proximity of rural-residential development on the southern and eastern boundaries, and on the opposite side of SH15A. However, as detailed elsewhere in this report, there are a range of rule and policy-based measures proposed to avoid and mitigate adverse effects on neighbouring properties, and to minimise potential reverse sensitivity.
The RS general suitability report confirms that there are no known reticulated infrastructure constraints that are not capable of resolution.
5.4 Plan Change 148 ‘Strategic Direction’
General
PC 148 is introducing a new ‘Strategic Direction’ chapter to the District Plan. PC 148 describes the chapter as:
containing the key strategic approach to development that will address significant resource management issues of importance to the District. The chapter contains overarching objectives
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 23
and policies that will guide decision making at a strategic level in relation to urban and rural development, the management of open space and regionally significant industries.
The MTPP is assessed against the relevant objectives and policies of PC 148 as follows:
SD-P24 – Light Industrial To provide for small scale industrial activities and larger scale trade retail activities by providing for the Light Industrial Zone in locations that: 1. Contain an existing range of industrial and large-scale retail activities. 2. Are in proximity to major transport routes. 3. Enable adverse effects on proximate Living and Green (open) Space Zones to be avoided. 4. Have minimal existing active frontages at ground floor. 5. Have a supply of medium to large sized sites. 6. Are in proximity to key resources and infrastructure.
Assessment
The MTPP site is a ‘greenfields’ site and so SD-P24(1) and (5) are not relevant. The MTPP site fits comfortably with the remaining part of this policy.
SD-O5 – Incompatible Activities Avoid conflict between incompatible land use activities from new subdivision and development.
SD-P2 – Incompatible Land Uses To manage the establishment and location of new activities to avoid conflicts between incompatible land uses.
SD-O13 – Unanticipated Activities Manage, and where appropriate avoid the establishment of activities that are incompatible with existing uses or unanticipated in the zone.
Assessment
There are a range of rule and policy-based measures proposed to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on neighbouring properties, and to minimise potential reverse sensitivity.
SD-O11 – Residential and Business Demand Ensure that there are sufficient opportunities for the development of residential and business land to meet demand.
SD-P8 – Housing and Business Capacity To ensure that there is sufficient residential and business development capacity by zoning land where Development is feasible and: (1) Is serviced with development infrastructure; or
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 24
(2) Funding for development infrastructure is identified in the Long Term Plan.
Assessment
The MTPP provides additional business land in a location that is serviced by existing reticulated Council infrastructure.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 25
6. SECTION 32 EVALUATION
6.1 Schedule 1 and Section 32 RMA
Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the process and procedural requirements for the preparation, change, and review of policy statements and plans. Both Schedule 1(5) (relating to the preparation of policy statements and plans prepared by local and regional authorities) and 1(22) (relating to requests for changes to policy statements and plans to local and regional authorities) contain a requirement to prepare and publish an evaluation report in accordance with Section 32 of the RMA, specifically:
5 Public notice and provision of document to public bodies
(1) A local authority that has prepared a proposed policy statement or plan must—
(a) prepare an evaluation report for the proposed policy statement or plan in accordance with section 32 and have particular regard to that report when deciding whether to proceed with the statement or plan; and
22 Form of request
(1) A request made under clause 21 shall be made to the appropriate local authority in writing and shall explain the purpose of, and reasons for, the proposed plan or change to a policy statement or plan and contain an evaluation report prepared in accordance with section 32 for the proposed plan or change.
Section 32(1)(c) requires that the evaluation under s32:
(c) contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal.
An evaluation of the MTPP objectives, policies and rules is provided below.
6.2 Appropriateness of objectives to achieve the purpose of the RMA
Section 32(1)(a) requires an examination of the extent to which the objectives10 of the proposal11 being evaluated are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act. The objectives of the MTPP are set out in Table 1 below:
10 objectives means,— (a) for a proposal that contains or states objectives, those objectives: (b) for all other proposals, the purpose of the proposal. (s32(6) RMA) 11 proposal means a proposed standard, statement, national planning standard, regulation, plan, or change for which an evaluation report must be prepared under this Act. (s32(6) RMA)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 26
Objectives
MTPP-O1 – Mix of Enable the establishment and growth of a range of new and Activities emerging businesses that promote knowledge creation, innovation and entrepreneurship in the fields of industry, research and development, science, agribusiness, engineering and technology.
MTPP-O2 – Supporting Enhance the working environment (staff well-being and activities productivity) by facilitating the establishment of land uses that support the day to day activities of staff and visitors at the MTPP (such as childcare centres, health related activities and facilities, food and drink outlets, and passive recreation facilities).
MTPP-O3 – Reverse Avoid activities that may result in reverse sensitivity effects that sensitivity compromise existing and future activities within the MTPP.
MTPP-O4 – Urban form Achieve an appropriate balance of built form, parking, landscaping, pedestrian connections, and open space.
MTPP-O5 – Subdivision Enable a range of lot sizes to support the needs of the various activities within the MTPP.
Table 1: MTPP Objectives
In determining whether the proposed MTPP objectives are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA, they are considered alongside retaining the Rural Production Environment (RPE), and the proposed LI objectives in Table 2 below:
Purpose of the RPE LI objectives MTPP objectives RMA (s5(2))
Enabling people and . No impact. . Enable industrial . Provides for communities to activities within specific activities provide for their specified and ancillary social, economic, parameters. support activities in and cultural well- order to utilise the
being and for their locational health and safety. advantages of the site.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 27
. Facilitate higher internal amenity to improve the social well-being of those working at the MTPP.
Sustaining the . Preserves the site . Provides for more . Provides for the potential of natural for other future general industrial reasonably and physical uses. activities that may foreseeable need resources to meet not be required at for data storage the reasonably this time. and technology- foreseeable needs of based activities. future generations.
Safeguarding the . No change to . Similar impact to . Similar impact to LI. life-supporting existing MTPP. capacity of air, environment. water, soil, and ecosystems
Avoiding, . No change to . Effects managed . Effects managed remedying, or existing through policies and through policies and mitigating any environment. rules. rules tailored to suit adverse effects of the characteristics of activities on the the site and the environment. activities that are to be enabled.
Section 6 – Matters . There are no . There are no . There are no relevant of national relevant matters of relevant matters of matters of national importance national national importance. importance. importance.
Section 7 – Other . Will maintain . Manages adverse . Manages adverse matters amenity values. effects on amenity effects on amenity values through values through policies and rules. policies and rules tailored to suit the characteristics of the site and the activities that are to be enabled.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 28
Section 8 – Treaty of . There is no known . There is no known . There is no known Waitangi impact on Treaty impact on Treaty of impact on Treaty of of Waitangi Waitangi Issues. Waitangi Issues. Issues.
Overall Evaluation Retaining the RPE will retain a status quo position in respect to the environment but will not provide for the reasonably foreseeable economic and social wellbeing of the Whangarei District and the wider northland area.
The LI provisions provide for more general light industrial activities that may be better located elsewhere, while the MTPP provisions provide for the reasonably foreseeable data storage and technology-based activities that are now required in the modern (digital) world.
The MTPP objectives better achieve the purpose of the RMA relative to the LI objectives because they are tailored to match the specific characteristics and locational advantages of this particular site.
Table 2: Comparison of objectives
6.3 Appropriateness of provisions to achieve the objectives
Section 32(1)(b) requires an examination of whether the provisions12 in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives. This examination is to be achieved by:
(i) identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and (ii) assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives; and (iii) summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions;
12 provisions means,— (a) for a proposed plan or change, the policies, rules, or other methods that implement, or give effect to, the objectives of the proposed plan or change: (b) for all other proposals, the policies or provisions of the proposal that implement, or give effect to, the objectives of the proposal. (s32(6) RMA)
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 29
Section 32(2) requires that the assessment of efficiency and effectiveness under s32(1)(b)(ii) must:
(a) identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for— (i) economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and (ii) employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and (b) if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs referred to in paragraph (a); and (c) assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions.
There are two reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives. These are:
1. Adopting the LI policies and rules. 2. Adopting the MTPP policies and rules.
Other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives
The relative merits of the MTPP and LI provisions in achieving the MTCP objectives is assessed in Tables 3 and 4 below:
MTPP Policies Assessment in context of equivalent LC policies
MTPP-P1 – Mix of To provide for a mix of . MTPP-P1 is similar to the equivalent activities activities to achieve Objective LI-P2, except that it is focussed on MTPP-O1, with those effects rather than scale. Scale is not activities permitted or a matter for concern given the managed according to nature of the activities that will be potential effects on internal enabled in the MTPP. amenity and reverse sensitivity.
MTPP-P2 – To achieve a high level of . There is no equivalent policy in LI. Internal amenity amenity for MTPP employees MTPP-P2 is intended help facilitate a and visitors by: higher level of internal amenity than most LI developments for social
1. Incorporating pedestrian benefit. connectivity within the overall MTPP layout and design. 2. Incorporating landscape planting within the overall layout and design.
MTPP-P3 – To manage the effects of The equivalent LI policy is LI-P4. MTPP- External amenity industrial and commercial P3 is more specific about how cross activities on the surrounding boundary effects should be managed, environment by: but ultimately the intent of the two policies is the same. 1. Establishing a vegetative screen around the perimeter of the site.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 30
2. Controlling noise generating activities in accordance with the NAV.
3. Appropriately locating activities within the MTPP to minimise adverse effects on amenity values. 4. Managing built form through a combination of height and landscaping.
MTPP-P4 – To ensure that any sensitive MTPP-P4 is similar to LI-P3, the key Reverse activities do not compromise differences being the references to sensitivity the operation of commercial scale and effects on other zones, and industrial activities neither of which are relevant to the enabled under the MTPP. MTPP given the nature of the activities that are enabled.
MTPP-P5 – Provide for a range of lot sizes MTPP-P5 recognises the special nature Subdivision where it is demonstrated that of the MTPP relative to other LI zones. It the proposed lot(s) support also recognises that lot size and and/or facilitate activities fragmentation are not relevant matters enabled under the MTPP. in the MTPP or in the context of managing effects on the environment.
Table 3: Options assessment - MTPP policies v LI equivalent policies
MTPP-R1 Any Activity Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P MTPP-R1 is subtly different to the equivalent LI-R1 to account for the Where: fact that the MTPP is a precinct. Resource consent is not required under any rule of the Light Industrial Zone or any other District Plan rules, unless otherwise permitted in the MTPP: The activity is not prohibited under any rule in the District Plan.
MTPP-R2 Building Height Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P MTPP-R2 is more restrictive than LI- R2 sub-area B for amenity reasons. Where: The maximum building height is 20m in MTTP sub-area A. The maximum building height is 8m in MTTP sub-area B.
MTPP-R3 Building Setbacks Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P MTPP-R3 is more restrictive than the equivalent LI-R3 for amenity reasons. Where:
In sub Area A:
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 31
The minimum building setback from SH14 and McCathie Road is 10m. The minimum setback from new internal road boundaries is 5m. The minimum setback from side boundaries is 3m
In sub-area B: The minimum setback from new internal road boundaries is 5m. The minimum setback from side boundaries is 3m
Activities Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
MTPP-R4 Telecommunications facility The activities under MTPP-R4 are generally more restrictive and MTPP-R5 Software and cloud-based services specific than those under the (including data centres) equivalent activity rules in the LI zone. The activities in the MTPP are tailored to enable technology-based MTPP-R6 Electricity substation activities.
MTPP-R7 Research and technology industry
MTPP-R8 Public utilities
MTPP-R9 Manufacturing and cloud storage
MTPP-R10 Call Centre
Activity Status: P
MTPP-R11 Recreational facilities Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P Recreational activities are non- complying activities in the LI Zone. They are enabled under MTPP-R11 to help achieve the internal amenity values and social wellbeing objectives and policies under the MTPP.
MTCP-R12 Educational facility ancillary to other Assessment in context of equivalent permitted activities in the MTPP LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Educational facilities are non- Status when complying activities in the LI Zone. compliance They are enabled under MTPP-R12 to not help achieve the intended achieved: D technology and knowledge sharing outcomes under the MTPP.
MTCP-R13 Offices not associated with a permitted Assessment in context of equivalent use LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity This rule is similar to LI-R23 except Status when that it is specific to offices rather compliance than commercial services, and it is
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 32
not not limited by scale. Scale is not achieved: D considered to an important factor in the MTPP. MTCP-R13 is more concerned with offices having a synergy with other permitted activities within the MTPP.
MTPP-R14 Care centre Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: D Care centres are non-complying activities in the LI Zone. They are enabled under MTPP-R14 to help achieve the internal amenity values and social wellbeing objectives and policies under the MTPP (i.e. children can attend day care while parents work on the same site). The discretionary activity status is proposed to control reverse sensitivity effects.
MTPP-R15 Light industry not otherwise permitted Assessment in context of equivalent in the MTPP LI rule
Activity Status: D MTPP-R15 is included to manage the effects of other industrial activities that may seek to locate on the site without any connection to other activities enabled under the MTPP.
MTPP-R16 Visitor accommodation ancillary to a Assessment in context of equivalent permitted use LI rule
Activity Status: D Activity Status Visitor accommodation (in general) is when a non-complying activity in the LI compliance not Zone. It is a discretionary activity achieved: NC under MTPP-R16 when ancillary to a permitted use. The discretionary activity status is proposed to control reverse sensitivity effects as necessary. The nature of the activities in the MTPP is such that any effects may be capable of being mitigated.
MTPP-R17 Commercial services not otherwise Assessment in context of equivalent permitted in the MTPP LI rule
Activity Status: D Activity Status MTPP-R17 is included to manage the when effects of other commercial services compliance not activities that may seek to locate on achieved: NC the site without any connection to other activities enabled under the MTPP.
MTPP-R18 Medical facility (excluding hospital) Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: D Activity Status Medical centres are non-complying when activities in the LI Zone. They are compliance not enabled under MTPP-R18 to help achieved: NC achieve the internal amenity values and social wellbeing objectives and policies under the MTPP (i.e. medical care is available on the site). The
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 33
discretionary activity status is proposed to control reverse sensitivity effects.
MTPP-R19 Food and drink activity Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Status This rule is the same as the when equivalent LI-R24 except that (2) is Where: compliance not not required to enable workers to be 1. The maximum GFA achieved: D serviced at all hours (assisting with of any individual social wellbeing) and (3) is not activity is 250m2. necessary due to screening required under other rules in the MTPP.
MTPP- Residential activities Assessment in context of equivalent R20 LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Status Residential activities are non- when complying in the LI zone. They are Where: compliance not enabled under MTPP-R20 only where 1. Residential achieved: NC they are ancillary to other permitted activities are activities. In such circumstances ancillary to other reverse sensitivity effects are less permitted activities likely. This is also a reflection of the in the MTPP. nature of the activities permitted in the MTPP relative to those in LI.
MTTP-R21 Security fencing Assessment in context of equivalent LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Status MTPP-R21 reflects the boundary when treatment required in the MTPP Where: compliance not relative to the LI. Because fencing is Any security achieved: D to be located behind landscape planting/bunding, there is no need fencing is to be located behind any for the other amenity-based landscape planting restrictions in LI-R5. required under MTP-R5.
MTPP- Landscape planting associated with Assessment in context of equivalent R22 internal roads LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Status MTPP-R2 is proposed to ensure a when higher level of internal amenity than Where: compliance not standard LI. All new internal achieved: D roads (private or public) have a 3m wide landscape area (excluding vehicle crossings and other infrastructure).
MTPP- Landscape bund and planting for new Assessment in context of equivalent R23 buildings and subdivision LI rule
Activity Status: P Activity Status MTPP-R23 is included to mitigate when visual effects. The RD status applies Where: compliance not to proposals to stage the achieved: RD bunding/screening in accordance
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 34
A 6m high Discretion is with incremental development of (minimum) 2m restricted to: the site. Staging will require specific wide (minimum) assessment to determine its
earth bund and/or (i) The effectiveness, hence the RD status. planting area is effectiveness installed along the of staged boundary with bunding and SH14 and McCathie planting in Road; and mitigating the visual A 6m high effects of (minimum) 2m built form. wide (minimum) earth bund and/or planting area is installed along the precinct boundaries with adjoining Rural Production Zone land. Note: Compliance with (2) is not required if the written approval of the adjoining landowner is provided.
Table 4: Options assessment - MTPP rules v equivalent LI rules
Efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed MTPP provisions
The efficiency and effective of the MTPP provisions in achieving the objectives is assessed in Table 5 below.
MTPP Provisions Benefits Costs
MTPP-P1 – Mix of Economic Economic activities . The proposed MTPP is predicted None known. to generate significant economic impacts, including a Environmental $48 million annual economic None known. benefit to the Whangarei economy. Social . The proposed MTPP is predicted None known. to generate 800 new jobs . The proposed MTPP is predicted to result in an initial construction impact of $180 million, a large share of which is expected to be retained in the Whangarei District.
Environmental . Manages and avoids reverse sensitivity.
. The mix of activities enabled in the MTPP reduces the number of trips required for ancillary
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 35
activities, ultimately benefitting the wider roading network. Social
Social benefits derived from not being exposed to the effects of heavy industry.
Cultural
None known.
MTPP-P2 – Economic Economic Internal amenity Potential improvements in Planting/landscaping costs. productivity. Environmental Environmental None known. Improved amenity values relative to standard LI. Social
Social None known Better work environment. Cultural Cultural None known
None known.
MTPP-P3 – Economic Economic External amenity None known. Landscaping costs. Environmental Environmental
. Avoids or manages reverse None known. sensitivity. Social . Helps to reduce adverse effects on the amenity values of None known. surrounding landowners. Cultural
Social None known. . Social benefits for adjoining residents. Cultural None known.
MTPP-P4 – Economic Economic Reverse sensitivity Avoids constraints on activities None known. enabled under the MTPP. Environmental Environmental None known. Avoids/manages reverse sensitivity effects. Social
Social None known. See ‘environmental’ above. Cultural Cultural None known.
None known.
MTPP-P5 – Economic Economic Subdivision None known. None known.
Environmental Environmental None known. None known.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 36
Social Social
None known. None known. Cultural Cultural
None known. None known.
Table 5: Efficiency and effectiveness
Summary of reasons for deciding on the provisions
The reasons for deciding on the MTPP provisions are as follows:
1. They are tailored to meet the specific characteristics and locational advantages of the site and the locality.
2. They provide for a range of activities that together result in a high level of internal amenity, benefitting social well-being.
3. They enable a range of permitted activities with effects that are appropriate to the locality.
4. They enable a range of restricted discretionary and discretionary activities that may be appropriate subject to further assessment and effects mitigation.
5. They avoid adverse effects on amenity values and character by excluding inappropriate/incompatible activities, and through the inclusion of amenity-based rules and controls on built form.
Risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information
There is no uncertain or insufficient information associated with the proposal.
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Page 37
ATTACHMENT 1
RS ENG SITE SUITABILTY REPORT
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY REPORT
McCathie Road Whangarei
ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY REPORT McCathie Road Whangarei
Report prepared for: Barry Trass - Marsden Technology Park
Report prepared by: Matthew Jacobson
Report reviewed by: Steve Turner
Report reference: 16602
Date: 3 July 2019
Issue Details Date 1 Draft Issue 27 May 2019 2 First Issue 14 June 2019 3 Amendments 25 June 2019 4 Amendments 3 July 2019
Contents
Introduction 1 Site Description 1 Desk Study 2 Geology 2 Historic Aerial Photography 3 WDC Hazards 4 NRC Hazards 5 3.4.1 Coastal Flooding 5 3.4.2 River Flooding 6 3.4.3 Tsunami Evacuation Zone 7 Previous Investigations 8 Field Investigation 8 Natural Hazards 8 Flooding 8 Tsunami Evacuation Zone 8 Acid Sulphate Soils 9 Future Building Suitability 9 Servicing 10 Stormwater 10 7.7.1 Disposal 10 7.7.2 Attenuation 11 Water 11 Sanitary Sewer 12 Access 12 Conclusions 12 Limitations 12
Appendices
A Drawings
B WDC Correspondence
File: 16602 3 July 2019 Issue: 4 ENGINEERING FEASBILITY REPORT McCathie Road Whangarei
Introduction RS Eng Ltd has been engaged by Barry Trass to investigate the feasibility of Lot 2 DP 348043, Lot 2 DP 325771, Section 13 SO 322547, Lot 1 DP 348043 and Lot 1 DP 386730 for a future technology park. The client proposes to make an application to create a new planning environment aimed at aiding and promoting technology development. The purpose of this report is to determine the engineering suitability of the property for commercial development, providing an assessment of natural hazard, geotechnical constraints, stormwater disposal and attenuation recommendations and assess the adequacy of existing Whangarei District Council (WDC) services at a level suitable to support the plan change application.
Site Description The properties are located on the north eastern side of the intersection between State Highway 15A and McCathie Road. The property is generally 5-8m mean sea level with a lower lying area in the north eastern corner being at 3m ae mean sea level. The upper area is rolling, currently in pasture with varying farm drainage. A deep channel which conveys overland flow from Marsden City to an attenuation pond bisects the northern part of the property.
Figure 1: Locality Plan (Source: www.topomap.co.nz)
Desk Study Geology The GNS 1:250,000 scale New Zealand Geology Web Map indicates that the property is located within an area that is underlain by Late Pleistocene age sediments, described as follows: “Weakly cemented sand in fixed transverse dune ridges”
Figure 2: Published Geological Map (Source: www.data.gns.cri.nz/geology/)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 2 Historic Aerial Photography We have undertaken a review of historic aerial photography from 1950 to present. See figure 3 below of a 1950 Image. No notable observations / matters of concern were made during the review, with the property being in agriculture use since the 1950’s.
Figure 3: 1950 Aerial Photograph (Source: www.retrolens.co.nz)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 3 WDC Hazards The Whangarei District Council has made two hazard designations across part of this property, denoted in Figure 4 below. Only the western and far northern parts of this property is designated at risk of acid sulphate soils by the WDC hazard mapping. A report prepared by Opus International Consultants for the WDC has given the opinion that where excavations are required below a depth of 5m MSL structures are at increased risk. A flood susceptibility designation has also been placed on the lower lying eastern part of the property.
Figure 4: WDC GIS Hazard Maps (Source: www.wdc.govt.nz)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 4 NRC Hazards 3.4.1 Coastal Flooding The NRC have designated a coastal flood hazard on this property. This zoning is based on an assessment by Tonkin and Taylor dated December 2017. This provided a 1% AEP coastal flood level of 2.9m RL which is limited of a small area of the property in the north western corner, shown on Figure 5 below.
Figure 5: 1% AEP Coastal Flood Hazard Extend (Source: NRC Natural Hazard GIS)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 5 3.4.2 River Flooding The NRC have designated a river flood hazard on his property. This hazard has been based on extensive modelling as part of the Priority Rivers Project to assess the flood susceptibility.
Figure 6: 1% AEP Flood Extent (Source: NRC Natural Hazard GIS)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 6 3.4.3 Tsunami Evacuation Zone The NRC have designated this property as being within a Yellow Zone for Tsunami Evacuation. This zone has been placed on this property in accordance with a guideline prepared by Civil Defence titled “Tsunami Evacuation Zones, Director’s Guideline for Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups [DGL 08/16]”.
Figure 7: Tsunami Hazard Evacuation Zone (Source: NRC Natural Hazard GIS)
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 7 Previous Investigations RS Eng Ltd, formally Richardson Stevens Consultants (1996) Ltd, completed thirteen Scala Penetrometer tests across this property during April 2007. It was inferred from this testing that peat overlies sandstone at a depth of 300mm to 1300mm, average 800mm.
RS Eng has also completed investigation on adjacent properties to the area of investigation. The depth of peat overlying sandstone is variable, having been recorded at up to 3.0m below the surface nearby.
Field Investigation A walkover inspection was made of the property by this office during May 2019. No signs of concern were noted during the inspection with the depth of peat overlying sandstone being observed in multiple excavations and cut embankments at less than 1-1.5m.
Natural Hazards Flooding A portion of this property is designated as flood susceptible by both the WDC and NRC. These designations are related to the low lying nature of the property on its eastern boundary which is susceptible to flooding from both the river and coastal flood scenarios. Aside from the designated flood zones, during extreme rainfall events overland flow will concentrate following natural flow paths.
Future development of this property will likely be limited to the elevated areas with the small lower lying portion being a prime position for future stormwater attenuation structures. To ensure suitable development of this property for future landuse we make the recommendations: • Non-habitable buildings achieve a minimum floor level of 5.5m RL. This is based on the mapped flood level with a conservative free board allowing which is of little consequence due to the existing ground levels • Overland flow paths are identified and defined to avoid adverse effects to access and development. • Future drainage or earthworks are designed to ensure that overland flows are not concentrated and/or adversely affect neighbouring properties.
Tsunami Evacuation Zone The determination of these zones was undertaken by GNS Science, detailed in a report titled “Tsunami Evacuation Zone Boundary Mapping: Northland Update” dated July 2016. From open coastline the following methodology was used “Under the open coast attenuation rule which applies to water flowing overland direct from the coast, the potential run-up height attenuates at a rate of 1 m for every 200 m horizontal inland (attenuation of 1:200, 0.5%). The initial level is the maximum possible run-up (at the coast) plus the maximum tidal level.” and for rivers “The river
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 8 attenuation rule for tsunami waves propagating along a river was used for rivers wider than 10 m. Under this rule, potential run-up height within a river channel attenuates at a rate of 1 m for every 400 m up river (1:400, 0.25%) and potential run-up height for flow over land from the river channel attenuates at a rate of 1 m for every 50 m (1:50, 2.0%). The initial level at the river mouth is the maximum possible run-up at the coast plus the tidal level if the river flows directly into the sea”.
In the situation were a tsunami propagates up the Ruakaka River, attenuation of over 10m would be achieved, prior to flowing over land. On this basis it is clear the zoning is critical to open coastal flow. To mitigate the effects of a potential Tsunami and remove the Yellow Tsunami Evacuation Zone from the property, either ground levels could be raised by filling or a bund of sufficient height could be installed. Based on an average distance of 2350m between the properties and the coastline and a maximum wave runup height of 21.4m, a minimum ground level or bund height of 9.65m RL would be required. Although this zoning is inconsequential to a resource consent, high-tech development would be supported by the mitigation of this zoning. The construction of a bund to an RL of 12.0m MSL in the north part of the property may not be efficient due to the limited space and ground levels, however in the south, with additional space and increased ground levels would be feasible.
Acid Sulphate Soils Sulphates have been deposited in these areas during the last significant sea level rise. When reacted with oxygen under the right conditions (generally areas with high groundwater tables), the sulphates can become acidic, which in turn can cause problems with the concrete components of structures beneath ground level.
Given the low lying natural of this property and presence of peaty soils the risk of acid sulphates is high. However, these soils are potentially isolated and dependent on the final development and future earthworks. Provisions will need to be a made to ensure future development adequately allows for this risk, with specific testing and design required on a project specific basis.
Future Building Suitability This property is general underlain by a shallow depth of peaty soils overlying sandstone at a varying depth. This terrain is common throughout the One Tree Point / Ruakaka area which is developed in clusters. The peaty soils are however not suitable to provide an adequate foundation for structures. It is common practice to undercut these soils and replace them with compacted engineered fill or use piling to transfer building loads to the underlying sandstone.
The property is generally considered suitable for commercial and industrial building development, however we recommend that specific geotechnical investigation and assessment are undertaken specific to each proposal to ensure adequate recommendation are applied.
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 9 Servicing Stormwater 7.7.1 Disposal This property naturally discharges runoff via two main routes towards a large open drain on a eastward neighbouring property. The south western portion of the property naturally concentrates runoff falling towards the south and east, being intercepted by McCathie Road, which directs flows eastward discharging into the large open channel. Runoff from the northern and eastern part of the property is less concentrated by the topography falling towards the east being intercepted by the large open drain. Future discharges from this property should be designed to mitigate any adverse effects to neighbouring properties and ensure cross boundary flow positions are maintained. It should also be noted that a deep channel bisects the northern end of the property, conveying overland flow from Marsden City to an attenuation pond on an eastward neighbouring property, refer to figure 8 below.
Figure 8: Natural Flow Paths
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 10 7.7.2 Attenuation The WDC Environmental Engineering Standards (EES) require attenuation of stormwater runoff from any increase in impervious areas so that post development peak flows are 80% of pre- development. Future development will require stormwater attenuation to ensure that the effects of increased runoff downstream are less than minor.
Provision for stormwater attenuation shall be made at either the subdivision or building consent stage. The southern part of the property would lend itself to a communal stormwater attenuation pond constructed as part of a development at the subdivision stage. The northern portion being not well defined would be better suited to site specific stormwater attenuation constructed at the building consent stage.
Water Two existing WDC water mains are present on McCathie Road (250AC and 375AC) and another on State Highway 15A (450PE). All three of these mains connect directly to the Ruakaka Water Treatment Plant. An estimate of daily usage is presented below in Table 1, based on guidance provided by Auckland Council for light usage of 4.5/m²/day.
Table 1: Estimated Water Supply Demand Parameter Flow (l/s) Peak Flow 17.8
Assessment of firefighting water supply requirements at this early stage is difficult, however it is likely that the Fire Water Classification would be either FW4 or FW5, with the potential for development beyond these classifications requiring on-site storage/systems. The requirements of these classifications are presented below in Table 2. It should also be appreciated that High- tech development commonly uses alternative methods for fire suppression to minimise the risk of water damage.
Table 2: Firefighting Water Classification Fire Water Required Water Additional Water Maximum Number Classification Flow Within 135m Flows With 270m of Fire Hydrants FW4 50l/s 50l/s 4 FW5 75l/s 75l/s 6
The WDC have advised that FW5 service is available to the property, a copy of this correspondence is attached Appendix B.
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 11 Sanitary Sewer To discharge sewage from future development of these properties, reticulation and connection to the Ruakaka Treatment Plant is required. An existing pump station which services Marsden City is located on the opposite side of State Highway 15a to the Northern end of the property.
The Ruakaka Sewer Treatment plant is at capacity however, it is the understanding of RS Eng Ltd that the WDC will be increasing the capacity of the plant as required to cater for future development (see correspondence with the WDC). Connection of future development to the WDC sewer could be achieved using several methods/ routes, however it is likely that due to the scale of the development the WDC will require a new connection to the Ruakaka Sewer Treatment Plant. This would require the construction of a new reticulation network discharge to a single pump station with a new rising main parallel to the existing Marsden City Mains. Preliminary estimation of discharge from the development is presented in Table 3 below. Due to the flat nature of the property, to avoid the need to multiple pumping stations a low pressure sewer network maybe employed.
Table 3: Estimated Sanitary Sewer Flows Parameter Flow (l/s) Peak Dry Weathered Flow 13.7
A central pump station would be required to have storage in the order of 1200m³ in accordance with the NRC Regional Plan, occupying approximately 1000-1500m².
Access Access to future developments will be made from McCathie Road. Any such intersections, roading and access will be constructed in accordance with the WDC polices and standards.
Construction of future access will likely require the undercutting of any peaty soils to provide an adequate subgrade. Specific investigation and design of any such roading will be required at the subdivision engineering design stage.
Conclusions It is the conclusion of RS Eng Ltd that the property is generally suitable for the proposed plan change subject to the provisions and recommendations detailed in this report.
Limitations This report has been prepared solely for the benefit of our client and the Whangarei District Council. The purpose is to determine the engineering suitability of the proposal, in relation to the
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 12 material covered by the report. The reliance by other parties on the information or opinions contained therein shall, without our prior review and agreement in writing, do so at their own risk.
Recommendations and opinions in this report are based on data obtained as previously detailed. The nature and continuity of subsoil conditions away from the test locations are inferred and it should be appreciated that actual conditions could vary from those assumed.
This report does not address matters relating to the National Environmental Standard for Contaminated Sites, and if applicable separate advice should be sought on this matter from a suitably qualified person.
If during the construction process, conditions are encountered that differ from the inferred conditions on which the report has been based, the site should be examined by a suitably qualified engineer to determine if any modification of the design based upon this report is required.
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Matthew Jacobson Steve Turner Senior Engineering Technician Chartered Professional Engineer NZDE(Civil), MEngNZ BE(Civil), CPEng, CMEngNZ
RS Eng Ltd
16602 – 3 July 2019 – Marsden Technology Park 13
Appendix A
Drawings
Lot 13 SO 322547 4.19ha
Port Marsden Highway
McCathie Road McCathie 10
11
10
8 14.98ha DP 348043 Lot 2
9 17.96ha DP 38673 Lot 1
10
10
5
9
10
8
5 Ruakaka McCathie Road Drawn by Date Location Client Scale Title B Trass Proposed Plan Change Contour Plan 25-6-19 NOTES: · · · · MJ 1:5000 If any part of these documents are unclear, please Do not scale off drawings. be reproduced without prior permission. Contours at 1.0m Intervals contact RSEng Ltd. This plan is copyright to RSEng Ltd and should not Rev A Approved by First Issue Notes Original File A3 16002 RS Eng Ltd 2 Seaview Road, [email protected] 09 438 3273 Whangarei 0110 Rev Sheet 1
Appendix B
WDC Correspondence
From: Diana Staveley To: Simon Charles; Matthew Jacobson Subject: RE: Marsden Tech Park McCathie Road Date: Wednesday, 12 June 2019 1:36:02 p.m. Attachments: image001.png image002.png image004.png mccathie FW5.JPG mccathie peak demand.JPG
Hi Matt,
Our hydraulic model shows that we have FW5 available in the adjacent 300mm main in McCathie Rd. I have done a simple single point demand model run of proposed peak demand, it has some effect on surrounding network but well within our standards. Of cource the development will need to be properly modelled at or before consent application, we provide an EpaNet file for this.
We are in the process of creating a master plan for Bream Bay water supply and will include scenarios with this type of potential future development.
Regards
Diana Staveley
Asset Engineer - Water | Water Services Department Whangarei District Council | Forum North | Private Bag 9023, Whangarei 0148 | www.wdc.govt.nz P 09 430 4200 | DDI 09 430 4264 | M 027 2555 930 | E [email protected] Like us on Facebook
WDC - Final email sig
From: Simon Charles Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2019 10:59 AM To: Diana Staveley
Hi Diana
Please could you respond to Matt
I know we currently have limited ability to provide fire flows any greater than FW2 in the area (from another recent query in the same area) but that there are plans to extend the 500 dia. main from Marsden City in future. What are the LTP timelines around this extension?
I understand he just wants confirmation around what we can currently provide and reassurance that we will be able to service the area in the future with planned upgrades.
Thank you Simon
From: Matthew Jacobson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2019 2:25 PM To: Simon Charles
Hi Simon,
I am working on a project for a proposed plan change at Ruakaka for a high tech related commercial and industrial development. The property in question is indicted on the attached sketch.
Being a rezoning it is difficult to determine expected flow demand at this early stage. Given that the site is approximately 33ha we would estimate Peak Daily Usage of 17.8l/s (Based on guidance from Auckland Council for light usage). Firefighting water supply - The classification of these properties will likely be FW4 or 5, which required flows as follows. It should be apricated that high-tech development often provide alternative means of fire suppression to minimise the risk of water damage.
Fire Water Required Water Flow Additional Water Flows Maximum Number of Fire Classification Within 135m With 270m Hydrants FW4 50l/s 50l/s 4 FW5 75l/s 75l/s 6
We are seeking an indication from the WDC around the suitability of the existing network for such a development, and what position the WDC is taking on future development in the area.
Cheers,
Matt Jacobson Senior Engineering Technician NZDE(Civil) RS Eng Ltd 09 438 3273 027 777 4025 www.RSEng.co.nz 2 Seaview Road, Whangarei 0110
Notice of Confidentiality: This transmission contains information that may be confidential and that may also be privileged. Unless you are the intended recipient of this message (or authorised to receive it for the intended recipient) you may not copy, forward, or otherwise use it, or disclose its contents to anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately and delete it from your system. ATTACHMENT 2
MTPP PROVISIONS
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
PREC1 – Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP)
Overview
The Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) applies to land located on the corner of SH15 and McCathie Road. Like the LI, the MTPP is located on the fringe of the Marsden Point/One Tree Point urban area (opposite Marsden City) and will generate a significant economic and employment opportunities for the district.
The MTPP location is in close proximity to the Hawaiki fibre optic cable linking Australia, New Zealand, American Samoa, Hawaii and the US West Coast. The cable has brought greater digital connectivity, diversity, capacity and security to New Zealand and offers many service benefits for telecommunications companies, Internet Service Providers, Cloud service providers and others. The MTPP is designed to enable these, and a range of other innovation and research-based activities.
The MTPP is intended to be a work and play zone, where a range of digital, technology, innovation and research-based activities are enabled along with supporting amenities to enhance the work environment. These supporting amenities include childcare facilities, healthcare facilities, cafes, dairies, and recreational facilities.
The MTPP has a specific suite of objectives and policies. The objectives and policies of the underlying LI zone do not apply to development in the MTPP.
The rules of the underlying LI zone and district-wide matters rules apply, except where amended by the MTPP rules. As stated in Rule HPW-R1.2, where an activity is subject to a precinct rule and the activity status of that activity in the precinct is different to the activity status in the zone or in the district-wide matter rules, then the activity status in the precinct takes precedence over the activity status in the zone or district-wide matter rules, whether that activity status is more or less restrictive.
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
Objectives MTPP-O1 – Mix of Enable the establishment and growth of a range of new and emerging activities businesses that promote knowledge creation, innovation and entrepreneurship in the fields of industry, research and development, science, agribusiness, engineering and technology.
MTPP-O2 – Supporting Enhance the working environment (staff well-being and productivity) by activities facilitating the establishment of land uses that support the day to day activities of staff and visitors at the MTPP (such as childcare centres, health related activities and facilities, food and drink outlets, and passive recreation facilities).
MTPP-O3 – Reverse Avoid activities that may result in reverse sensitivity effects that sensitivity compromise existing and future activities within the MTPP.
MTPP-O4 – Urban Achieve an appropriate balance of built form, parking, landscaping, form pedestrian connections, and open space.
MTPP-O5 – Subdivision Enable a range of lot sizes to support the needs of the various activities within the MTPP.
Policies
MTPP-P1 – Mix of To provide for a mix of activities to achieve Objective MTPP-O1, with those activities activities permitted or otherwise managed according to potential effects on internal amenity and reverse sensitivity.
MTPP-P2 – Internal To achieve a high level of amenity for MTPP employees and visitors by: amenity 1. Incorporating pedestrian connectivity within the overall MTPP layout and design.
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
2. Incorporating landscape planting and open spaces within the overall layout and design.
MTPP-P3 – External To manage the effects of industrial and commercial activities on the amenity surrounding environment by:
1. Establishing a vegetative screen around the perimeter of the site. 2. Controlling noise generating activities in accordance with the NAV. 3. Appropriately locating activities within the MTPP to minimise adverse effects on amenity values. 4. Managing built form through a combination of height and landscaping.
MTPP-P4 – Reverse To ensure that any sensitive activities do not compromise the operation of sensitivity commercial and industrial activities enabled under the MTPP.
MTPP-P5 – Subdivision Provide for a range of lot sizes where it is demonstrated that the proposed lot(s) support and/or facilitate activities enabled under the MTPP.
MTPP-R1 Any Activity
Activity Status: P Where: Resource consent is not required under any rule of the Light Industrial Zone or any other District Plan rules, unless otherwise permitted in the MTPP: The activity is not prohibited under any rule in the District Plan.
MTPP-R2 Building Height
Activity Status: P Where: The maximum building height is 20m in MTTP sub-area A.
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
The maximum building height is 8m in MTTP sub-area B.
MTPP-R3 Building Setbacks
Activity Status: P Where:
In sub Area A:
The minimum building setback from SH14 and McCathie Road is 10m. The minimum setback from new internal road boundaries is 5m. The minimum setback from side boundaries is 3m
In sub-area B:
The minimum setback from new internal road boundaries is 5m. The minimum setback from side boundaries is 3m
MTPP-R4 Telecommunications facility
MTPP-R5 Software and cloud-based services (including data centres)
MTPP-R6 Electricity substation
MTPP-R7 Research and technology industry
MTPP-R8 Public utilities
MTPP-R9 Manufacturing and cloud storage
MTPP-R10 Call Centre
Activity Status: P
MTPP-R11 Recreational facilities
Activity Status: P
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
MTCP-R12 Educational facility ancillary to other permitted activities in the MTPP
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: D
MTCP-R13 Offices not associated with a permitted use
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: D
MTPP-R14 Care centre
Activity Status: D
MTPP-R15 Light industry not otherwise permitted in the MTPP
Activity Status: D
MTPP-R16 Visitor accommodation ancillary to a permitted use
Activity Status: D Activity Status when compliance not achieved: NC
MTPP-R17 Commercial services not otherwise permitted in the MTPP
Activity Status: D Activity Status when compliance not achieved: NC
MTPP-R18 Medical facility (excluding hospital)
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
Activity Status: D Activity Status when compliance not achieved: NC
MTPP-R19 Food and drink activity
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: D Where:
1. The maximum GFA of any individual activity is 250m2.
MTPP-R20 Residential activities
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: NC Where:
1. Residential activities are ancillary to other permitted activities in the MTPP.
MTTP-R21 Security fencing
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: D Where:
Any security fencing is to be located behind any landscape planting required under MTP-R5.
MTPP-R22 Landscape planting associated with internal roads
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: D Where:
PREC1 Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP) Appendix A
All new internal roads (private or public) have a 3m wide landscape area (excluding vehicle crossings and other infrastructure).
MTPP-R23 Landscape bund and planting for new buildings and subdivision
Activity Status: P Activity Status when compliance not achieved: RD Where: Discretion is restricted to: A 6m high (minimum) 2m wide (minimum) earth bund and/or (i) The effectiveness of staged bunding planting area is installed along the and planting in mitigating the visual boundary with SH14 and McCathie effects of built form. Road; and A 6m high (minimum) 2m wide (minimum) earth bund and/or planting area is installed along the precinct boundaries with adjoining Rural Production Zone land. Note: Compliance with (2) is not required if the written approval of the adjoining landowner is provided.
ATTACHMENT 3
URBAN ECONOMICS REPORT
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
² ² ² ²
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ATTACHMENT 4
SIMON COCKER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE REPORT
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK
PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT
Assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects DRAFT
2 July 2019
18153_01
INDEX
1.0 Introduction 2
2.0 Assessment methodology 2
3.0 The proposal 2
4.0 Existing environment 5
4.1 Topography, geology and hydrology 5
4.2 Vegetation 7
4.3 Land use 7
4.4 Statutory context 8
4.5 Visual catchment and viewing audience 9
4.6 Identified landscape values 10
5.0 Assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects 11
5.1 Background 11
5.2 Assessment of effects 12
5.2.2 Biophysical (Abiotic attributes) 13
5.2.3 Biophysical (Biotic attributes) 13
5.2.4 Associative meanings and values 13
5.2.5 Experiential attributes 14
5.2.6 Landscape effects 14
5.3 Visual amenity effects 14
5.3.1 Potentially affected individuals 14
6.0 Conclusion 18
Appendix 1 Effects ranking and descriptor 19
Appendix 2 Proposed mitigation 21
Appendix 3 Figures 23
- 2 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Simon Cocker Landscape Architecture has been engaged by Reyburn and Bryant, to undertake a landscape and visual amenity assessment for a submission to PC 88 to change the zone of the site from Rural Production Environment to a Light Industrial "Precinct" – being the Marsden Technology Park Precinct (MTPP), with a focus on technology based activities, but will also include supporting amenities such as childcare facilities, healthcare facilities, cafes, dairies and recreational facilities.
The MTPP will have a specific suite of objectives and policies. The rules of the underlying LI zone and district-wide matters rules apply, except where amended by the MTPP rules.
This document will focus upon a description of the existing environment, and the proposal and an analysis of the landscape and visual values of the site and its context, and an assessment of the potential landscape and visual effects of the activity.
2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
The assessment has been prepared by a Registered Landscape Architect with reference to the Quality Planning Landscape Guidance Note 1 and its signposts to examples of best practice, which include:
• Best Practice Note 10.1, Landscape Assessment and Sustainable Management, New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architects (2010). • Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition, Landscape Institute (UK) and IEMA (2013). • Information Requirements for the assessment of Landscape and Visual Effects, Auckland Council (2017).
In addition, this report has been prepared in accordance with the NZILA (New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architects) Code of Conduct1.
Effects Ratings and Definitions
An outline of the effects ratings and definitions used in this assessment is provided in Appendix 1. In summary, the significance of effects identified in this assessment are based on a seven-point scale which includes nil, very low; low; moderate-low; moderate, high and very high
3.0 THE PROPOSAL
The applicant seeks to change the zone of the site from Rural Production Environment to a Light Industrial "Precinct" with its own objectives, policies and rules. A copy of the proposed provisions is included as Appendix 2 to this assessment.
It is important that the site be developed such that risks from natural hazards such as flooding and tsunami are eliminated, the site being partially within the Tsunami Hazard Risk Evacuation Zone. The proposal therefore includes the raising of levels – through the importation of fill material.
The area subject to the proposed technology “precinct” is depicted on Figures 1 and 2 of Appendix 3. The process of developing the plan is described below.
1 Contained in Appendix 1 of: http://www.nzila.co.nz/media/50906/registered_membership_guide_final.pdf - 3 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
3.1 General principles
The Marsden Technology Park draft plan seeks to guide the development of an over-arching structure plan for the site, promoting a flexible, sustainable framework of clear connections, innovation environments, and appealing indoor and outdoor spaces that attract people to visit and work in the Park.
It recognizes the differing requirements, constraints and potential effects associated with the differing land uses – these being the data centre, and the technology park – and also takes into account the constraints and opportunities arising from the site and its setting.
Key stages in the development of the structure plan has resulted from a process of information gathering, and analysis. This process enabled the development of a suite of design principles, as follows.
3.2 Overarching Design Principles
The following development principles have been developed to provide guidance to the structure plan.
• Create a campus identity and aesthetic across the site; • Unify the site through a network of nodes and open spaces; • Promote green infrastructure strategies that form a long term sustainable approach including stormwater, car parking and streetscape interventions; • Create a legible structure; • Strengthen visual, physical and ecological connections between Marsden Technology Park, landscape and ecological features of the area, and neighbouring communities, and; • Recognition of the differing amenity requirements arising users of and visitors to the two principle and separate land uses.
3.3 Movement Principles
• Recognise the differing traffic volume and parking requirements generated by the two principle and separate land uses; • Provide a variety of road typologies (service, local and shared roads) aimed at balancing access, safety and amenity outcomes; • Promote walking and cycle accessibility through the provision of high quality facilities; • Integrate sustainable stormwater infrastructure approaches with movement infrastructure, and; • Protect connectivity to the future neighbourhood centre and surrounding growth areas.
Figure 3 illustrates the proposed structure plan for the subject site, based on the above analysis.
Access is limited to McCathie Road, and the main access ‘spine’ will function as a connection between businesses and other enterprises locating themselves in the Park. It assists to provide legibility for users of the Park, and is envisaged to present a high level of amenity thereby creating an attractive ambiance that characterises the development.
Junction nodes are envisaged along the ‘spine’ which will also be landscaped. The alignment of the northern length of the spine road focuses distant views on Mt Lion / Manaia.
It is suggested that two sub-zones be created within the site. The approach to development within these sub-zones will be guided by the zone provisions, and reflects the sensitivity of adjoining neighbours. The southern portion, and north - 4 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
western edge of the site is less visually sensitive, and has the potential to be screened through mounding and planting. As is shown on the structure plan, included as Figure 3, the creation of 6.0 metre high screen comprising planting of a combination earth bunds / planting along the State Highway 15A and along the McCathie Road site frontage is proposed. The appearance of these bunds is similar to that illustrated in photo 1.
To the east of the main ‘spine’ road, a more sensitive area of the site occupies the eastern edge where a number of neighbouring rural residential properties adjoin the site. It is recommended that built development this area be to a lower density and that buildings are of a lower height, with a greater focus on landscaping and amenity, linked with the existing stormwater pond and the ecological linkages attendant with the ponds. Planting within this area can also function to provide a buffer for views from Ruakaka to the east.
A 6.0m high earth bund and / or planting will extend around these boundaries (where the adjoining land is zoned Rural Production zone) although, recognising that occupants of neighbouring dwellings may prefer to retain some measure of spaciousness, with views into the site, the rules will permit non-compliance with this requirement if written approval with the neighbouring landowner is provided.
It is intended that the landscape framework within the site – providing internal amenity, mitigation of external effects by softening and separating views of built form, and ecosystem services with regard to stormwater treatment – will include planting around the ponds (as identified above), and planting within the road corridors.
Internal roads shall have a 3.0m wide landscape area. This planting will be selected from a defined palette of shrubs and trees and will ensure that a consistent ribbon of vegetation, with regularly spaced specimen trees is established along the road corridors within the site.
It is recommended that the preparation of a planting strategy for the site, to be approved by Council be required as conditions of consent at the time of subdivision. This will detail the proposed bund plantings, plantings within the ‘drainage / amenity areas, and plantings for road corridors.
A suite of mitigation measures are contained in Appendix 2 and are proposed to mitigate the potential adverse effects of the proposed MTPP These mitigation measures will be integrated into the proposed MTPP provisions.
4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
4.1 Topography Geology and Hydrology
As can be seen from Figure 1, on a broad scale, the landscape comprises a flat coastal plain, fringed on its eastern edge by the Bream Bay coastline. The plain is described as being part of the Marsden Pont barrier spit – a broad peninsula comprising Quaternary coastal sand dunes, estuarine and alluvial sediments.
To the north west by the steep Takahiwai Hills form a dominant backdrop to the coastal plan, and these hills extend to the east, separating the northern portion of the plain, from the southern portion.
The broad Ruakaka River valley forms a part of the southern portion of the plan, and this river – tracing a meandering route first flowing east and then swinging south – discharges into Bream Bay at Ruakaka.
The coastal plain has been modified by both agricultural activities and latterly by built development, but the landform still retains evidence of its coastal depositional formative origins. The low lying hummocky terrain which form a series of linear ridges and swales with a relief in the vicinity of 5.0 metres – suggest remnant dune formations, as do occasional remnant
- 5 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
dune lakes. Active dune fields are present along the arc of the Bream Bay coastal edge some 1,500 metres to the east of the site.
Nearer the Ruakaka River, and in the vicinity of the site, the soil comprises mainly reworked sands and sediments deposited by the river. These sediments have covered a greywacke ridge that prior to sediment deposition connected two small outcropping knolls (visible in photos 2, 3 and 4) with the Takahiwai Hills. The knoll located on the eastern side of Port Marsden Highway between McCathie Road and the Ruakaka River still appears to form an extension of the Takahiwai Hills where they extend to the south east. The second knoll forms an isolated feature and is located near the intersection of Marsden Point and McCathie Roads. Identified as Sargent’s Hill, this feature is vegetated with pine trees and accommodates a water reservoir.
Geology
The Marsden / Ruakaka area’s lithology comprises three main units, namely:
1) The unconsolidated and unweathered sands covering the coastal plain from the Takahiwai Hills to the coastline, forming active dunes along the Bream Bay coastline and more fixed dunes inland of this. These generally comprise wind-blown sands and/or clayey ground conditions.
2) The areas of unweathered, unconsolidated and soft alluvium, gravel and minor peat soils, which correspond with the main surface drainage channels within the coastal floodplain (i.e. the Ruakaka River, Takahiwai Stream, and the inland depressions draining into Blacksmiths Creek and the One Tree Point area).
3) The interbedded greywacke sandstones and mudstones of the Takahiwai Hills.
The geotechnical report2 describes the site as being located within an area that is underlain by Late Pleistocene age sediments, described as “weakly cemented sand in fixed transverse dune ridges.”
Hydrology
The hydrology of the area is influenced by the Takahiwai Hills and the flat nature of the coastal plain. The area between the Takahiwai Hills and east coast, and south to Ruakaka has 3 main drainage catchments, being:
1. Ruakaka Catchment; which encompasses the subject site, and northward to a rough east-west aligned primary drainage divide just south of McEwan Road. All surface run-off in this catchment drains into the Ruakaka River, which enters the sea through a breach in the dunes at Ruakaka.
2. Whangarei Harbour Catchment, including the area to the north of the primary drainage divide, with surface run- off draining into the Harbour via four sub-catchments;
3. Bream Bay Catchment, including the Refinery site (which drains into the harbour and the sea) and the area to the south of the Refinery along the coast, draining into Bream Bay via the Berich drain.
The subject site is contained within the Ruakaka catchment. Within this catchment, the Marsden Point – Ruakaka Structure Plan water infrastructure report3 identifies the “old Ruakaka lake” – which is situated close to the north eastern boundary of the site (refer to Figure 2) – along with two remnant dune lakes (to the immediate west of the Racecourse, and at the
2 RS Eng. Engineering Feasibility Report. 25 June 2019. Section 3.1 3 Cook Costello. Marsden Point – Ruakaka Structure Plan Water Infrastructure Report. Far North Holdings 2008. - 6 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
intersection of McEwan and Marsden Point Roads as being of conservation value. Another stormwater retention pond adjoins the site on its eastern boundary. This pond is fed, in part, by a drain which bisects the site west – east, out falling into its north western corner.
As with much of the lower-lying land to the north and east, the site has been significantly modified with respect to its hydrological attributes. The natural drainage patterns have been disrupted, and storm water collected and removed via the drainage network.
4.2 Vegetation
The site and it context is characterised as a modified agricultural landscape, and has largely been cleared of natural bush. Remnant areas of natural vegetation are to be found on the eastern slopes of the Takahiwai Hills, in isolated patches on the hills to the south, on riparian margins, on the coastal fringe, and otherwise only to a very minor extent in localised areas.
Two dune lake ecotones are found at the intersection of McEwan and Marsden Point Road, and to the immediate west of the Racecourse.
With the exception of clusters of vegetation within rural residential properties, the landscape within the context of the site displays an open and exposed character, with long views across the largely flat terrain. In places shelterbelts impose a rectilinear structure on the landscape and provide some sense of enclosure.
A maintained evergreen shelterbelt, growing along the shared western and northern boundaries between the subject site and Lot 5 DP 146672 (refer to Figure 3) provides good visual separation. Figure 3 also shows how the shelterbelt along the western boundary extends to the north, into the subject site, before ‘angling’ to the east. An overgrown pine shelterbelt occupies the eastern site boundary at its northern end, partially separating the site from the Old Ruakaka Lake.
4.3 Land use
The land use pattern of the wider context of the site is strongly influenced by the long coastline and desirability of living at the water’s edge, deep water accessibility for the Port, the location of the Refinery and Power Station sites and adjacent coastal conservation area, the topography and availability of large tracts of flat land.
This wider land use pattern is broadly characterised by:
• Conventional coastal township development in three areas; at Marsden Village and One Tree Point - (including the partially developed Marsden Cove), and within the Ruakaka township;
• Residential ribbon development along both sides of Marsden Point Road between Ruakaka Village and the Ruakaka town centre.
• The Port and Refinery at Marsden Point and the surrounding zoned industrial land to the south (mostly undeveloped except for small clusters of industries to the north of the Ruakaka town centre, and the lumber plant near the refinery.
• Lifestyle blocks, generally in two areas (ie to the west of Marsden Point Road, along and to the south of McCathie Road, and around The One Tree Point – McEwan Roads area);
- 7 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
• A pocket of development contained on its western and southern / eastern sides by One Tree Point Road and State Highway 15A. To date, the infrastructure for this area (zoned Marsden Primary Centre, and identified as ‘Marsden City’ – Refer to Figure 4) has been constructed, with view to this being developed for residential, commercial and light industrial uses. Within the southern part of this area, light industrial uses have been established, and the first stage of a retirement village has been recently completed.
• the balance of the wider landscape comprises productive units of various sizes, predominant under pasture, and retains a predominantly rural character.
As identified above, to the south west of the site, occupying the elevated land – this being the ‘knoll’ described above – and occupying the lower lying land to the east of the knoll and on the south side of McCathie Road, are a number of rural residential properties.
In addition, a number of rural residential properties adjoin the site on its south eastern edge. These proximate residential properties are described in detail in section 4.5.
4.4 Statutory Context
Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) sets its purpose and principles. Part 2, Section 5 states that the purpose of the RMA is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. Section 6 sets out the matters of importance that must be recognised and provided for in achieving the purpose of the RMA. Section 7 contains other matters that must be given particular regard to, and section 8 states that the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi must be taken into account in achieving the purpose of the RMA.
The protection of outstanding natural features (ONF) and landscapes (ONL) from inappropriate subdivision, use and development is identified as a matter of national importance in section 6(b). There are no ONL or ONF identified on or within close proximity of the site (refer to Figure 2).
Section 7 identifies a range of matters that shall be given particular regard to in achieving the purpose of the RMA. Of relevance to this proposal is section 7(c) the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values. This is considered in this report in relation to potential effects on landscape elements and character, and visual amenity.
The above matters, together with the Regional Policy Statement (under the Northland Regional Council (‘NRC’)) and District Plan (under the jurisdiction of the Whangarei District Council) provide background to inform the assessment of landscape and visual effects.
The RPS and Operative Whangarei District Plan identifies the Takahiwai Hills Forest to the west as an Outstanding Natural Landscape (ONL) however the site is not contained within this overlay.
In the Whangarei District Plan the land is zoned Rural Production (refer to Figure 4). This zone is described in the Plan as comprising a varied array of topography, landforms, landscapes, soil types, biodiversity and catchments. The Plan states that it is important that the ecological and landscape values of the RPE are recognised and where appropriate are protected and enhanced. RPE.1.1 states that the purpose of the zone is to:
• Protect, sustain and promote rural production activities as well as those activities that support rural communities; • Protect areas of significant ecological and biodiversity values (such as indigenous bush and wetlands); • Enable the rehabilitation of ecological and biodiversity values, and; • Maintain rural amenity and character.
- 8 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
To the west, a Plan Change undertaken some 5 years ago rezoned land (across the State Highway to the west of the site) to Marsden Primary Centre Zone. This zone is designed to:
• Enable the mixed use development of the site; • Use urban design principles to lead the design process; • Use a tiered approach for development assessment (Master Planning, Precinct Planning and various development and activity overlays); • Allow a mix of different urban activities; the use of innovative design and engineering solutions; and a staged approach in recognition of the long development timeframe of the site, and; • Avoid reverse sensitivity effects.
To the north east, and adjoining the site on its northern tip, the land is zoned Business 2. This zone generally contains a wide range of business and light industrial areas on the fringes of the Central Business District.
The Marsden Point – Ruakaka Structure Plan (2008) proposes that the site be zoned Industry – Light (refer to Figure 5). The elevated land adjoining the site to the south is shown on the Structure Plan map to be zoned Rural Residential – reflecting it existing use. The flatter land to the east of the rural residential ‘knoll’ is shown on the map as being zoned Residential Medium Intensity.
Separating the site from the Ruakaka settlement to the east, the Structure Plan map shows the existing pastoral land to be maintained as Open Space.
The Structure Plan therefore anticipates that the landscape character of the site will change and assume a more built character.
4.5 Visual Catchment and Viewing Audiences
The visual catchment of the site is contained to the west and south west by the elevated land associated by the Takahiwai Hills, and the greywacke knoll situated to the easts of the State Highway. These elevated landforms do however offer views to the site and whilst the slopes to the west of the State Highway are currently devoid of settlement, they do offer easterly views across the site (refer to photos 2, 3 and 4).
Views into the site from the low lying land between the site and the hills are possible. Occupants of vehicles travelling north along State Highway 15A, approaching the site from the south experience direct views into the site with Mt Lion and Te Whara as background foci. Similarly, vehicles travelling along McCathie Road also offer long views across the site with these landforms and background features (refer to photo 5).
To the north west, users of One Tree Point Road have the ability to gain direct views in to the site as they travel south east. Similar views are available from the land to the north of State Highway 15A. A number of commercial properties have been constructed within this development, as has the first stage of a retirement village. The retirement village is strongly inwardly focused, with its boundaries on Waiwarawara Drive fenced, but views are possible from Waiwarawara Drive itself across the State Highway.
The State Highway also offers direct views into the site along much of the length of its western boundary and these can be experienced by users of the road travelling both to the north east and south west (refer to photo 6).
The knoll to the east of the State Highway is occupied by a number of dwellings – visible in photos 2, 3 and 4, and identified in Figure 5 – and these offer elevated views across the site. Properties containing dwellings that offer views are as follows:
- 9 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
• Lot 2 DP 371883; • Lot 1 DP 209949, and; • Lot 2 DP 209949.
A number of dwellings are accessed off McCathie Road on the flatter land to the east of the knoll. These properties tend to be generously landscaped with established boundary plantings which buffer the dwellings from the road, and as such, views from the dwellings to the subject site are restricted. Those dwellings which offer potential views are as follows:
• Lot 5 DP 371883; • Lot 3 DP 209949 • Lot 1 DP 341314, and; • Lot 2 DP 341314
A number of properties adjoin the subject site along its convoluted eastern boundary. Located on McCathie Road, a dwelling within a 3 ha property identified as Lot 5 DP 146672 is screened from the site by a dense and well maintained shelterbelt on the shared boundary.
To the north of this latter property, a small lot protrudes into the subject site. Identified as Lot 1 DP 325771, this 5000m2 lot is fenced, but not screened from the site on three sides, and the single storey dwelling benefits from a ‘borrowed’ outlook – principally to the north west – across the site. The flatness of the coastal plan allows long views from directions to the north east and east.
Adjoining, and located close to McCathie Road, a cluster of dwellings within Lots 2 and 3 DP 308942, and Lot 1 DP 67804 are between 100 – 300 metres from the nearest site boundary and are buffered - being an isolated ‘finger’ of the subject site which projects to the south. These dwellings appear to offer views into this ‘finger’ and that part of the site directly to the north, but not into the wider part of the site. Proposed boundary planting will on the southern and western sides of the ‘finger’ will preclude views into the site in future. The planting will not noticeably reduce the level of amenity afforded by views into the site due to the separation distance (a minimum of 160 metres) between the dwellings and the site boundary.
A dwelling, located some 100 metres from the southern boundary of the ‘finger’ is situated within Lot 1 DP 308942. Views into the site from this dwelling will be screened by the proposed boundary planting, and due to the separation distance, and the northern orientation of the dwelling, the loss of views into the site will not diminish the amenity afforded occupants of this dwelling.
The shared boundary is vegetated with a dense mix of vegetation but fragmented views into the ‘finger’ and the site to the north (along its eastern boundary) appear to be possible.
The site is partially visible from Marsden Point Road to the east – separated from the site by between 300 – 750 metres. Illustrated in photos 7, 8, 9 and 10, only distant views of the northern part of the site are available across the flat landscape, with the southern part hidden by vegetation.
4.6 IDENTIFIED LANDSCAPE VALUES
The Whangarei District Landscape Assessment4 (WDLA) identifies the site as being within the T27 land unit. Contained within the Farmed flats category, and are a result of coastal and alluvial landscape processes. The WDLA identifies that;
4 LA4 Landscape Architects Ltd. Far North District Landscape Assessment. 1995 - 10 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
in general, units within this category tend to display a rectilinear pattern of paddocks, which brings a very controlled, production atmosphere to the landscape. These patterns are sometimes reinforced by shelterbelts, but such features are usually too sporadic to be considered a dominant feature. It describes the landscape as having a ‘broken’ appearance, which ranges from expansive open spaces to more intimate spaces close to shelter.
Within the Farmed flats category, housing tends to be prominent and poorly integrated since the flat landscape offers little opportunity for integration. Where buildings are better integrated, extensive planting has been employed. The sensitivity rating assigned to the T27 unit is 4. With the highest ranking being 7 (outstanding), 4 represents a low to moderate level of sensitivity.
Within the wider context, the Takahiwai Hills – some 3.0km to the west – are identified in the Northland Regional Policy Statement as being an Outstanding Natural Landscape.
Both the Takahiwai Hills (Forest) and the Ruakaka Forest are identified in the protected natural areas report for the Waipu Ecological District5 as Level 1 sites – Q07/124 and Q07/121 respectively.
The pnap report also identifies the littoral strips of vegetation which define the alignment of the Waiwarawara Stream – to the west and north west of the site, as forming part of the Priority Level 1 site – Ruakaka River Forest Remnants (Q07/119) – a lowland river complex containing…
“…the best representative examples in Waipu ED of a formerly extensive floodplain forest type …… Floodplain forest is also a nationally rare habitat type.”
Also within the wider landscape context, the Ruakaka Duneland (Q07/128), Ruakaka Racecourse dune lake (Q07/129), the Ruakaka River estuary (Q07/130), and the McEwen Road wetland (Q07/131), are all identified as Level 1 sites
The above documents provide some guidance with respect to assessing the ‘value’, or quality of the landscape associated with the subject site. The WDLA in particular is helpful, determining that the sensitivity of the landscape unit within which the site is situated is scored as ‘3’. With 7 being classified as outstanding, and 6 being significant, a score of 3 is slightly lower than average.
This evaluation is supported when the site and its environs are assessed against the attributes set out in Table 2 contained in Appendix 1. This assessment has determined that the landscape quality is at most, ‘Ordinary’. It displays a distinguishable landscape structure, characteristic patterns of landform and land cover often masked by landuse, together with some features worthy of conservation, and some detracting features.
5.0 ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL AMENITY) EFFECTS
5.1 Background
Preceding sections describe the characteristics of the property and site, its setting and the proposal (including mitigation). The purpose of this section is to define the effects of the application upon the site and setting, to consider how the proposal
5 Jenny Lux, Tim Martin and Sarah Beadel Natural areas of Waipu Ecological District: Reconnaissance Survey Report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme. Dept. of Conservation, Northland Conservancy. 2007 - 11 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
would impact upon the experience of people viewing the development from outside of the site, and to comment upon the level of landscape, and visual effects.
Landscape change can, but does not necessarily result in adverse visual effects. Natural and human induced change is a constant within the landscape. The key is to manage this in such a way that any adverse visual effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
5.2 Assessment of Effects
The effects covered in this assessment, include those that can occur in relation to physical features, viewing audiences and visual amenity and/or on the site’s contribution to the existing landscape character and amenity values, as follows:
• Landscape character and amenity effects derive from changes in the physical landscape, which may give rise to changes in its character and how this is experienced. This may in turn affect the perceived value ascribed to the landscape. • Visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views as a result of changes to the landscape, to people’s responses to the changes, and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity.
Landscape and visual impacts can result from change in the components, character or quality of the landscape. Usually these are the result of landform or vegetation modification or the introduction of new structures, facilities or activities. All these impacts are assessed to determine their effects on landscape character and quality, and on public and private views. In this report, the assessment of potential effects is based on a combination of the landscape's sensitivity and visibility and the nature and scale of the development proposal.
The nature of landscape and visual effects generated by any particular proposal can, therefore, be:
• Positive (beneficial), contributing to the visual character and quality of the environment. • Negative (adverse), detracting from existing character and quality of environment; or • Neutral (benign), with essentially no effect on existing character or quality of environment.
Landscape, and visual amenity effects can be rated on a seven-point scale from Very High, through to Very Low.
The degree to which landscape and visual effects are generated by a development depends on several factors, these include:
• The degree to which the proposal contrasts, or is consistent, with the qualities of the surrounding landscape. • The proportion of the proposal that is visible, determined by the observer’s position relative to the objects viewed. • The distance and foreground context within which the proposal is viewed. • The area or extent of visual catchment from which the proposal is visible. • The number of viewers, their location and situation (static or moving) in relation to the view. • The backdrop and context within which the proposal is viewed • The predictable and likely known future character of the locality • The quality of the resultant landscape, its aesthetic values and contribution to the wider landscape character to the area.
Change in a landscape does not, of itself, necessarily constitute an adverse landscape or visual effect. Landscape is dynamic and is constantly changing over time in both subtle and more dramatic transformational ways, these changes are both - 12 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
natural and human induced. What is important in managing landscape change is that adverse effects are avoided or sufficiently mitigated to ameliorate the effects of the change in land use. The aim is to provide a high amenity environment through appropriate design outcomes, including planting that can provide an adequate substitution for the currently experienced amenity.
5.2.2 Biophysical – Abiotic Effects
Whilst the site has already undergone a level of modification with respect to its hydrological systems, the proposal – which requires the raising of levels, the construction of buildings and the control of stormwater using urban systems – will result in a marked change in the abiotic attributes of the site.
As a result of the modification to date, it is the opinion of the author that the sensitivity of the landscape with regard to its abiotic attributes has been reduced. Notwithstanding this, the proposed technology “precinct” will facilitate a change in the site which will generate a high level of abiotic effects.
5.2.3 Biophysical – Biotic Effects
As with the abiotic attributes, the site has been significantly modified as a result of vegetation clearance, and disruption of its ecological processes.
The proposed filling of the site, and construction of buildings, roads and other infrastructure will further diminish the biotic attributes of the site, such that, although the sensitivity of the landscape with regard to its biotic attributes has been reduced, the proposal will result in a high level of biotic effects.
5.2.4 Associative meanings and values (including spiritual, cultural or social associations)
The author is not aware of any specific spiritual, cultural or social associations linked to the site. The wider landscape displays a rural character – a sense of pastoral openness – but is influenced by the presence of built development both as isolated clusters, or individual scattered buildings. Individuals are likely to value views to the rural and coastal landscape (being views to the Whangarei Heads landforms). Whilst not highly scenic, the low-lying pasture, native and exotic vegetation attendant within these pastoral landscapes, and scattered dwellings (the appearance of which generally reflects the rural vernacular), typify the Northland rural and coastal landscape and as such, are valued by the community.
This combination of ‘settled’, ‘productive’ and ‘natural’ landscape appears to be accepted and valued by the local community.
Although the proposal will introduce a built character into this pastoral and productive landscape which will markedly change the existing character from one which is rural, with a high level of spaciousness, to one which is built and urban in character. Mitigation measures, enforced through the proposed technology “precinct” rules, will moderate the visibility of built form, and mitigate their effect to some degree.
It is considered however, that the future zoning as prescribed by the Marsden Point – Ruakaka Structure Plan (2008) has signalled a change in the use and character of the rural landscape associated with the site and its context. The site, and properties along its eastern boundary are identified as being overlain by a light industrial zoning, whilst the rural residential properties on the low lying land to the south of McCathie Road are shown as being overlain by a medium intensity residential zone. As a consequence, it is the opinion of the author that a change in the character of the landscape is likely to have been anticipated by members of the community. - 13 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
5.2.5 Experiential attributes
The (visual) experiential attributes are considered in some detail in section 5.3 of this assessment. Section 5.3 concludes that for a limited number of proximate neighbours with direct views across the site, the potential effect will be high, and for elevated viewers to the south west, the level of effect will be moderate. For all other viewers, the potential effects will be mitigated to a level that is low.
5.2.6 Landscape Effects
The change facilitated by the proposed technology “precinct” will result in a marked level of landscape change that will detract from the abiotic and biotic attributes of the site, and will have the potential to diminish both associative attributes and experiential attributes. As such, the level of potential adverse landscape effect will be high.
This conclusion has to be considered in the context of the potential future land use signalled by the Marsden Bay – Ruakaka Structure Plan which identified the site as light industrial. It is the opinion of the author that the potential adverse landscape effects that would result from such as change in the zoning would be similar to that described in the assessment above.
5.3 Visual Amenity Effects
5.3.1 Potentially affected individuals
The primary viewers can be gathered into six main groups, based on a commonality of views-types and geographical locations. These are as follows:
1. Users of State Highway 15A, and One Tree Point Road;
2. Occupants of, and visitors to businesses located to the north west of the site
3. Occupants of dwellings located to the south west and south of the site
4. Occupants of dwellings adjoining the site, or located between the site and McCathie Road to the south
5. Viewers located to the east and north east of the site.
Within these geographical groups, there exist subgroups, including occupants of residential properties, occupants of vehicles and pedestrians, and visitors to, or occupants of commercial premises and offices. The sensitivity to change within the visual environment of these subgroups varies, with occupants of dwellings being most sensitive, whilst users of the road / occupants of vehicles being least sensitive.
5.3.2.1 Users of State Highway 15A, and One Tree Point Road.
Existing views from One Tree Point Road are only available to users of the road travelling south and approaching the junction. From this location, direct views across the State Highway are possible into the site, and at present the site retains a pastoral openness.
- 14 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
Users of State Highway 15A also experience long views across the site to the east and south east, although such views are more restricted where the State Highway adjoins the site at its northern end, where the road level is below that of the site.
The proposal will result in the construction of a bund / planting of some 6.0 metres in height along its western and southern (State Highway 15A, and McCathie Road) frontages. The bund will be planted with a dense mix of native species. Within some 5 years, the combined bund and planting will form a screen which will limit views from both of these roads into the site such that only the upper part of buildings and roofs are visible.
The bund and associated vegetation will create a sense of enclosure along the eastern side of the State Highway which will conflict slightly with the existing open landscape character, although shelterbelts are a common feature of the contextual landscape and once mature, such interventions also result in a similar degree of visual enclosure. Over time, as the Marsden Primary Zone land to the west of the State Highway assumes a more built character, the urban character of the landscape will become more prevalent and the contrast between the MTPP and open (rural) landscape will be less apparent.
It is the opinion of the author therefore the level of potential adverse visual amenity effect that will be experienced by this transitory viewer group will be low.
5.3.2.2 Occupants of, and visitors to businesses located to the north west of the site.
Representative view 2: The flat terrain to the west of the site tends to limit longer views across the landscape where there are intervening elements or structures. Thus, as built development has occurred along Waiwarawara Drive and Pokapu Road, then these buildings block views from locations further to the north west. At present, where vacant land still exists along the southern side of Waiwarawara Drive, then views from that road, across the State Highway to the site are possible. In addition, properties located along the south side of Waiwarawara Drive also offers views to the site.
As with the previous viewer group, the proposed bund and planting will limit views of future development within the site. Viewed from these more remote locations, the angle of view has the potential to allow views of the roofs of buildings along the north western edge of the site.
The light industrial units constructed along the southern side of Waiwarawara Drive have, to date tended to be oriented toward the road, and away from the State Highway. This trend is expected to continue, and as such, the focus of views for these individuals is away from the subject site.
Transitory views are possible from Waiwarawara Drive at present at a minimum separation distance of some 120 metres, and from units located within the newly constructed retirement village. Such views have the State Highway as a foreground element, and although the change is expected to be noticeable, it is the opinion of the author that the level of potential adverse effect that will be experienced by these individuals will be low at most.
5.3.2.3 Occupants of dwellings located to the south west and south of the site
As previously identified, the knoll to the east of the State Highway is occupied by a number of dwellings – visible in photos 2, 3 and 4 – and these offer elevated views across the site. This includes dwellings within Lot 2 DP 371883, Lot 1 DP 209949, Lot 2 DP 209949, and Lot 2 DP 315798 (located on the ridge crest to the south east of the knoll).
Occupants of these dwellings currently benefit from a panoramic outlook to the north west, north, north east and east, including views to Bream Bay, the off-shore islands and the volcanic peaks associated with Whangarei Heads. The site
- 15 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
forms a midground part of the panorama, as does the land currently being developed to the north of State Highway 15A and east of One Tree Point Road.
The proposal will result in a marked change in the character of the midground landscape, from pastoral and rural, to built and urban. The change will also be evident at night, when street lighting will illuminate the road network within the site.
The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any view for these individuals, but the change will be recognisable immediately when the roading infrastructure is constructed. Over time, the character of the site will become more urban and built as the development becomes populated. At the same time, the proposed landscape mitigation planting (being the external boundary planting on bunds, internal road reserve planting, and planting associated with the drainage / amenity areas) will gain in stature and will serve to soften the built form and infrastructure to some degree.
It is the opinion of the author that the potential adverse visual amenity effects facilitated by the proposed MTPP, and experienced by these individuals will be moderate.
A number of dwellings accessed off McCathie Road are located on the flatter land to the east of the knoll. Dwellings which offer potential views are Lot 5 DP 371883, Lot 3 DP 209949, Lot 1 DP 341314, and Lot 2 DP 341314. For the majority of these properties, views appear to be largely internalised, with garden plantings buffering the dwellings and outdoor living areas from McCathie Road. Having said this, the dwelling within Lot 5 DP 371883 is elevated slightly above the road and appears to offer views to the north and into the site.
Apart from the occupants of this latter property, these individuals gain little benefit from views toward and into the site. Construction of the proposed bund, and planting thereof will fully screen views into the site and screen views of future built development within the site.
It is the opinion of the author that the potential adverse visual amenity effects facilitated by the proposed technology “precinct” and experienced by these individuals will be very low
5.3.2.4 Occupants of dwellings adjoining the site, or located between the site and McCathie Road to the south.
Representative view 4: A number of properties adjoin the subject site along its eastern boundary. Located on McCathie Road, a dwelling within a 3 ha property identified as Lot 5 DP 146672 is screened from the site by a dense and well maintained shelterbelt on the shared boundary. It is proposed that this shelterbelt be retained.
To the north of this latter property, a small lot protrudes into the subject site. As described previously, Lot 1 DP 325771, is fenced, and open to the site on its north western, north eastern and south eastern sides (refer to photo 11). The single storey dwelling therefore benefits from a ‘borrowed’ outlook – principally to the north west – across the site. The flatness of the coastal plan allows long views from directions to the north east and east, including the volcanic peaks at Whangarei Heads, and the off-shore islands.
Adjoining, and located close to McCathie Road, a number of dwellings within Lots 1, 2 and 3 DP 308942, and Lot 1 DP 67804 are between 100 – 300 metres from an isolated ‘finger’ of the subject site which projects to the south. These dwellings appear to offer views into this ‘finger’ and that part of the site directly to the north, but not into the wider part of the site.
A dwelling, accompanied by a number of accessory buildings located within Lot 1 DP 308942 adjoins the ‘finger’ on its eastern side. The shared boundary is vegetated with a dense mix of vegetation but fragmented views into the ‘finger’ and the site to the north (along its eastern boundary) appear to be possible.
- 16 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
The occupants of this dwelling currently benefit from the ‘borrowed’ views into and across the subject site, and the site provides them with a sense of rural privacy and isolation. The proposal will have the potential to detract from the sense of rural privacy and isolation, and will also have the potential to obscure longer views into and across the site.
Recognising the sensitivity of these individuals, the proposed technology “precinct” has sought to moderate the level of effect on these individuals by identifying a sub-zone which places a greater level of restriction on future development. This includes a more restrictive height control, the purpose of which is to promote a scale of development within the portion of the site adjoining these properties that is more sympathetic to its residential neighbours.
Due to the scale of the change that will be facilitated by the proposed technology “precinct”, the potential adverse visual amenity effect that will be experienced by occupants of Lot 1 DP 325771 will be high.
Lot 5 DP 146672 is fully screened from the site by existing vegetation and it is the opinion of the author that the level of effect that will be experienced by occupants of the dwelling within this lot will be low.
Adjoining, and located close to McCathie Road, a cluster of dwellings within Lots 2 and 3 DP 308942, and Lot 1 DP 67804 are between 100 – 300 metres from the nearest site boundary and are buffered - being an isolated ‘finger’ of the subject site which projects to the south. These dwellings appear to offer views into this ‘finger’ and that part of the site directly to the north, but not into the wider part of the site. Proposed boundary planting will on the southern and western sides of the ‘finger’ will preclude views into the site in future. The planting will not noticeably reduce the level of amenity afforded by views into the site due to the separation distance (a minimum of 160 metres) between the dwellings and the site boundary.
It is the opinion of the author that the level of effect that will be experienced by occupants of these lots will be low.
A dwelling, located some 100 metres from the southern boundary of the ‘finger’ is situated within Lot 1 DP 308942. Views into the site from this dwelling will be screened by the proposed boundary planting, and due to the separation distance, and the northern orientation of the dwelling, the loss of views into the site will not diminish the amenity afforded occupants of this dwelling.
It is the opinion of the author that the level of effect that will be experienced by occupants of this lot will be low.
Lot 2 DP 146672 adjoins the ‘finger’ on its eastern side, and a two storey dwelling within this lot is situated close to the shared boundary in the south western corner of the lot. The location, and orientation of this dwelling suggests that its primary focus is to the north west (toward the volcanic peaks of Whangarei Heads). Terraces on the north western and north eastern sides of the dwelling offer outdoor living and views across the ‘finger’ and into the main body of the northern part of the site.
Since the occupants of this dwelling currently benefit from the ‘borrowed’ views and a sense of rural privacy and isolation, the proposal will have the potential to detract from the sense of rural privacy and isolation, and will also have the potential to obscure longer views into and across the site.
Due to the scale of the change that will be facilitated by the proposed MTPP, the potential adverse visual amenity effect that will be experienced by occupants of Lot 2 DP 146672 will be high.
- 17 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
5.3.2.5 Viewers located to the east and north east of the site.
Representative view 5: The site is partially visible from Marsden Point Road, and from properties (both residential and commercial) located along that road. These public and private view locations are separated from the site by between 300 – 750 metres.
As is Illustrated in photos 7, 8, 9 and 10, only distant views of the northern part of the site are available across the flat and exposed landscape, with the southern portion hidden by vegetation. Due to the flatness of the topography, built development to the west of the site is also visible from these locations, and forms a part of the background context to the subject site.
The proposal will facilitate the construction of built form within the subject site up to a height of 20.0 metres. The buildings within the northern part of the site will be visible from these locations, but at the separation distances involved, the change from the existing situation will only be perceived as being slight, and it is the opinion of the author that the potential adverse visual amenity effect of the proposal as experienced by these individuals will be low.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
The proposed MTPP seeks to establish a technology park zone. The MTPP will have a specific suite of objectives and policies. The rules of the underlying LI zone and district-wide matters rules apply, except where amended by the MTPP rules.
The provisions associated with the zone have been crafted such that they allow some flexibility with regard to future development proposed for the park, but also guide future development with a view to establishing a flexible, sustainable framework of clear connections, innovation environments, and appealing indoor and outdoor spaces that attract people to visit and work in the Park. In addition, the proposed provisions also seek to mitigate the potential adverse effects.
The site is currently rural in character, and is located within the Rural Production Environment. To the north west, across the State Highway, the land has been zoned as Marsden Primary Centre zone. This has allowed the development of residential, commercial and light industrial activities.
The subject site is identified in the Marsden Bay – Ruakaka Structure Plan as ‘light industrial’. This signals the likely future rezoning of the site and land adjoining to the east for development, and anticipates that the character of the landscape will become more urban.
Potential landscape effects will – due to the change in land use – be high. Similarly, potential adverse visual amenity effects will be elevated for the most proximate neighbours, although the effects experienced by potential viewers within the wider catchment will be mitigated to a level that is (at most) low.
The level of landscape and visual amenity effect must be considered in the context of the future zone change to a light industrial zone, as signaled in the Marsden Bay – Ruakaka Structure Plan. Seen in this light, the level of effect generated by the proposal is akin to the level of effect that would eventuate from a light industrial zoning.
On this basis, it is the author’s opinion that the proposal can be supported from a landscape and visual perspective.
Simon Cocker Registered Landscape Architect. 2 July 2019
- 18 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
APPENDIX 1: Effects ranking and descriptor
Note: Shaded cells potentially represent more than minor effects under the RMA.
Report descriptor RMA equivalent Explanation No Effect No effects. No part of the proposal is discernible. And / or - The proposal will have no effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have no effect on the perceived amenity derived from it. Very Low Effect Less than minor effect under RMA. The proposal constitutes only a very minor component of, or change to the wider view. Awareness of the proposal would not have a marked effect on the overall quality of the scene. And / or - The proposal will have very low level of effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have a very low level of effect on the perceived amenity derived from it. Low Effect Less than minor effect under RMA. The proposal constitutes only a minor component of, or change to the wider view. Awareness of the proposal would not have a marked effect on the overall quality of the scene. And / or - The proposal will have low level of effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have a low level of effect on the perceived amenity derived from it. Low – Moderate Effect Minor effect under RMA The proposal may form a visible and recognisable change or new element within the overall scene which may be noticed by the viewer, but which does not detract from the overall quality of the scene. And / or - The proposal will have a low to moderate level of effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have a low to moderate level of effect on the perceived amenity derived from it. Moderate Effect Effects of some significance. The proposal may form a visible and recognisable change or new element within the overall scene and may be readily noticed by the viewer and which detracts from the overall quality of the scene. And / or - The proposal will have moderate level of effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. High Effect Significant effect. The proposal forms a significant and immediately apparent part of, or change to the scene that affects and changes its overall character. The proposal will have high level of effect on the character or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have a high level effect on the perceived amenity derived from it. Very High Effect Very significant effects The proposal becomes the dominant feature of the scene to which other elements become subordinate and it significantly affects and changes its character. And / or - The proposal will significantly change the characteristics or key attributes of the receiving environment. And / or - The proposal will have a significant effect on the perceived amenity derived from it.
- 19 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
Determination of landscape quality Category Criteria Typical Example High - Exceptional Strong landscape structure, International or nationally recognised site – national park. characteristics, patterns, balanced combination of landform and land cover Appropriate management for land use and land cover Distinct features worthy of conservation Sense of place No detracting features
High Strong landscape structure, Nationally or regionally recognised site – national park characteristics, patterns, balanced combination of landform and land cover
Appropriate management for land use and land cover but potential scope for improvement. Distinct features worthy of conservation Sense of place Occasional detracting features
Good Recognisable landscape structure, Nationally, regionally recognised site all or great majority characteristics, patterns, balanced of area of local landscape importance combination of landform and land cover still evident Scope to improve management for land use and land cover Some features worthy of conservation Sense of place Some detracting features
Ordinary Distinguishable landscape structure, characteristic patterns of landform and land cover often masked by landuse Some features worthy of conservation Some detracting features
Poor Weak landscape structure, characteristic patterns of landform and land cover often masked by landuse Mixed land use evident Lack of management and intervention has resulted in degradation Frequent detracting features
Very poor Degraded landscape structure, characteristic patterns of landform and land cover are masked by landuse Mixed land use dominates Lack of management and intervention has resulted in degradation Extensive detracting features
Damaged landscape Damaged landscape structure Single land use Disturbed or derelict land requires treatment Detracting features dominate. Table 2 has been adapted for NZ conditions from an example of threshold criteria used by practitioners in the United Kingdom. The original document was prepared by Jeff Stevenson Associates and published in Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment (“GLVIA”) 3rd Edition. Landscape Institute (UK) and IEMA 2013
- 20 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
APPENDIX 2: Proposed mitigation measures
Mitigation measure Purpose / intent Rule
Technology park sub-zone A
Setback from State Highway To allow for construction of planted bund and to MTPP-R3 boundary 10.0m. Setback from mitigate potential McCathie Road boundary 10.0m
Setback from internal road To provide a sense of spaciousness within the site MTPP-R3 boundaries - 5.0m and to allow for the establishment of a landscaped strip.
Setback from side boundaries To provide separation between built form.. MTPP-R3 (side yard) – 3.0m
Technology Park sub-zone B
Maximum building height within To mitigate potential adverse effects experienced MTPP-R2 technological park Area B – 8.0m by neighbouring properties.
Setback from internal road To provide a sense of spaciousness within the site MTPP-R3 boundaries 5.0m and to allow for the establishment of a landscaped strip.
Setback from side boundaries To provide separation between built form. MTPP-R3 (side yard) – 3.0m
Internal road corridors and nodes
3.0m wide landscape area to Planting within the road corridor and at nodes to MTPP-R4 comprise, at a minimum, supplement and compliment future planting within specimen trees (that will achieve adjoining property frontages. a scale appropriate to the scale of future built form), planted at 8 .0 Planting at nodes to be of a scale that is appropriate – 10.0m centres. Shrub and tree to the scale of the infrastructure, and designed to planting at nodes. assist with legibility of the transport network. All landscape design shall take into account CPTED principles.
- 21 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
Provision of pedestrian and Footpath / cycleways along road corridors to link Policy MTPP-P2 cycling linkages with shared pathway circuits around site. Shared pathways to create linkages and circuits beyond main roading network, including utilization of drainage / amenity zones.
Drainage / Amenity areas
To be planted with locally Provision of function as amenity and recreational Policy MTPP-P2 appropriate native species features as well as for stormwater detention purposes, and landscaped to achieve these outcomes.
State Highway and McCathie Road boundaries
6.0m planting / planted bund, Provision of screen to mitigate both visual and Policy MTPP-P3 densely planted with native potential noise effects. species. Security fencing to be MTPP-R4 integrated with bund / planting.
Infrastructure - general
Encourage use of low impact This includes the creation of swales and raingardens General recommendation urban design and development along road corridors, for the purpose of both (LIUDD) techniques and efficient treatment of run off and for amenity infrastructure. benefits.
- 22 - MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Proposed technology precinct assessment of landscape and visual amenity effects
MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT
Landscape and visual amenity assessment
Appendix 3 - Figures
2 July 2019
The Site 0m 10m20m 40m 60m 80m MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT 0m 200m 400m 600m 800m 1000m FIGURE 1: Location of the site SH15A
One Tree Point Road Old Ruakaka Lake
Waiwarawara Drive VP7 Stormwater retention pon
Marsden Point Road
VP8
McCathie Road
VP9
VP10
Ruakaka River Sargeants Hill
The Site MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT ViewpointViewpoint locations locatio 0m 50m 100m 200m 300m 400m FIGURE 2: Context of the site and photograph locations Technology Park sub-zone A Shelter / screen (planting and mounding Existing shel erbelt Shelter / screen (planting MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Technology Park sub-zone B Primary / secondary access network Signage PROPOSEDMARSDEN LIGHT TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT PARK Cycling / walking shared path PROPOSED PRIVATE PLAN CHANGE Drainage / Amenity sub-zone FIGURE 3: Structure Plan 0m 20m 60m 100m 160m Green node FIGURE 5: Conceptual Structure Plan
The site MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT 0m 100m 200m 300m 400m FIGURE 4: District Plan zoning VP6
VP3
VP2
VP11
VP5
Lot 1 DP 325771 Lot 5 DP 371883 Lot 3 DP 209949
Lot 2 DP 146672
Lot 5 DP 146672 Lot 1 DP 146672
VP4 Lot 1 DP 67804
Lot 2 DP 308942
Lot 3 DP 308942
Lot 2 DP 341314 Lot 1 DP 341314
Viewpoint locations MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Existing drain PROPOSED PRIVATE PLAN CHANGE 0m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m 0m 20m 60m 40m 100m Existing shelterbelt FIGURE 5: The site VP8
MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT 0m 25m 50m 100m 150m 200m FIGURE 6: Marsden - Ruakaka Structure Plan map Photo 1 (top) - Existing pla ted bund (Rauriri Drive) MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Photo 2 (bott.): View from site to south showing properties on el vated land(120o panorama) 0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 February100m 2019 (top), 05 November 2018 (bo om) (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified o Photo 3 (top) - View to south from western edge of site (120 panorama) MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Photo 4 (bott.): View north west along McCathie Road (120o panorama) 0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 November100m 2018 (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified Photo 5 (top): View north from McCathie Road, near State Highway junction (120o panorama) Photo 6 (bott.) - Vi w from State Highway 15A heading south west (120o panorama) MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK 0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 November100m 2018 (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified o Photo 7 (top) - View from near junction of La eside Road and Marsden Point Road (120 panorama) MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Photo 8 (bott.): View from near junction of Sime oad and Marsden Point Road (120o panorama) 0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 November100m 2018 (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified o Photo 9 (top) - View from near junction of eter Snell Road and Marsden Point Road (120 panorama) MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK Photo 10 (bott.): View from near junction of McC thie Road and Marsden Point Road(120o panorama) 0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 November100m 2018 (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified Photo 11 (top) - View of dwelling within Lot 1 DP 325771 from site MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK
0m 40m 80m 160m PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PRECINCT Photo 2: View to south along harbour edge and open space Photo20m date - 60m05 November100m 2018 (Photographs taken with digital equivalent of 50mm focal length unless otherwise specified ATTACHMENT 5
MARSHALL DAY NOISE REPORT
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
MARSDEN TECHNOLOGY PARK INITIAL NOISE ASSESSMENT Report No.001 | 22 March 2019
84 Symonds Street PO Box 5811 Wellesley Street Auckland 1141 New Zealand T: +64 9 379 7822 F: +64 9 309 3540 www.marshallday.com
Project: Marsden Technology Park
Prepared for: Reyburn and Bryant PO Box 191 Whangarei 0140
Attention: Brett Hood
Report No.: Report No. 001 20181204
Disclaimer Reports produced by Marshall Day Acoustics Limited are based on a specific scope, conditions and limitations, as agreed between Marshall Day Acoustics and the Client. Information and/or report(s) prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics may not be suitable for uses other than the specific project. No parties other than the Client should use any information and/or report(s) without first conferring with Marshall Day Acoustics. The advice given herein is for acoustic purposes only. Relevant authorities and experts should be consulted with regard to compliance with regulations or requirements governing areas other than acoustics. Copyright The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Marshall Day Acoustics constitutes an infringement of copyright. Information shall not be assigned to a third party without prior consent.
Document Control
Status: Rev: Comments Date: Author: Reviewer: Approved - - 22 Mar 2019 Peter Ibbotson Curt Robinson
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 4
2.0 SITE AND SURROUNDS ...... 4
3.0 PROPOSAL ...... 5 3.1 Notes on Sound Levels Assumed ...... 6 3.1.1 Chillers ...... 6 3.1.2 Packaged Air Conditioning Plant ...... 6 3.1.3 Generators ...... 6 3.1.4 Ancillary Plant ...... 6
4.0 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS ...... 9 4.1 Site Visit ...... 9
5.0 WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL NOISE RULES ...... 10 5.1 Noise Rules – Typical Operation ...... 10 5.2 Noise Rules – Emergency Generator Testing ...... 10 5.3 Noise Rules – Construction ...... 11 5.4 Noise Duration ...... 11
6.0 CALCULATIONS AND ANALYSIS ...... 11 6.1 Calculated Noise Levels ...... 12
7.0 RESULTS SUMMARY ...... 13
8.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS ...... 14
APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY
APPENDIX B WHANGAREI NAV NOISE AND VIBRATION RULES
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION This report provides initial information on the expected noise emissions from the proposed Marsden Technology Park. The report has been prepared as part of the initial due diligence works for the site and to inform the requirement for planning regulations or a private plan change. Detailed technical information on the proposed data centre is not available. Architectural drawings of the proposed site are not available, nor are any indicative mechanical selections of cooling plant or backup power. Marshall Day Acoustics has prepared this assessment based on the assumptions detailed within this report. It will be necessary for others to review these assumptions and provide further information or clarification to Marshall Day Acoustics where necessary to provide more certainty over noise emissions. 2.0 SITE AND SURROUNDS The site is located at McCathie Road, Marsden Point. The site is located in a Rural Countryside zone and is in proximity to lifestyle blocks and dwellings to the east and south. State Highway 15a runs to the north and east of the site and separates the site from a mixed-use development (GNLC). Much of this mixed-use area is greenfield, however some of which has recently been developed as a retirement village. Scattered commercial development has occurred and is occurring throughout this area. A school and commercial area is located some 1000m to the east. The Marsden Point area contains a range of activities including significant assets such as the Refining NZ refinery and Northport. There are large areas of business zoned land along State Highway 15a that have not yet been developed. The zoning and surrounds are illustrated in Figure 1 and 2.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 4
3.0 PROPOSAL It is proposed to establish a “Tier 41” data centre on the site. The potential size of the data centre is not known. Although a developed design has not been provided of the data centre it is likely that the data centre will comprise the following in terms of noise generation. Note that the following table is generic. Noise emission from proposed plant should be provided to allow a review of the assumptions used. Table 1: Sources of Noise on Site
Source Description Range of Sound Power Levels
Emergency Data centres require generators to provide Containerised generators: 2 generators power in the event that power from the main c. 98 dB LWA each grid becomes unavailable. Generators can be Generators (more than one) in containerised in sound attenuated enclosures buildings: or located in generator halls (which are 3 c. 110 dB LPrev typically masonry buildings). Generators are likely to run infrequently, but must be tested on a monthly basis.
Cooling Data centres can be cooled using a range of Chillers: Plant methods, typically this involves large chiller 85 to 95 dB LWA each plant or packaged air conditioning units Packaged Air Conditioning units: located outdoors. A range of sound power 93 to 96 dB LWA (each with one levels can be associated with this plant and bank of 3 to 4 scavenger fans)) associated fans. Plant can be located at ground level or at elevation.
Ventilation Outdoor air fan intakes and exhaust air Rooftop fans: fans and discharge terminations are likely to be present 60 to 80 dB LWA each ancillary around the site. Where internal fans are used, Internal fans: plant noise can be controlled using well tested varies, can be negligible if designed engineering methods. If external rooftop fans well are used, sound power levels may vary. It is expected that DX outdoor units may be required around office and administration areas.
Traffic Noise emission from parking areas is not TBC normally significant. Passenger vehicle movements on site normally generates little noise in comparison to traffic on nearby roads.
1 A Tier 4 data centre is understood to be “fault tolerant” and can continue to operate during unplanned outages or emergencies. 2 This sound power level relates to a single c. 1000 kW generator in a well-designed enclosure. Poorly performing enclosures could have greater sound power levels associated with them. 3 This is an example of the sound pressure level that can be measured within generator halls during operation of the main generators. The actual noise level will depend on the generator used, the wall lining and whether generators are containerised or unenclosed.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 5
3.1 Notes on Sound Levels Assumed 3.1.1 Chillers It is not known how the data centre will be cooled. Although the sound power level of chillers can vary widely, chillers we have previously considered for other data centres have had claimed sound power levels of 86 dB LWA. Other data centres have offered c. 900 kW chillers at a sound power level of 88 dB LWA each. We have measured chillers at other data centres with sound power levels that are higher than these claimed levels. Chillers can be tonal. If the chiller is determined to be tonal then the level of noise emission increases by 5 decibels to take into consideration the special audible character of the chiller. The tonal component is typically a result of the compressor rather than the ventilation fans. Ventilation fans typically have a broad-spectrum noise which assists at masking tones generated by the compressor. Screw chillers typically have a special audible character. Chillers that operate at higher speeds with alternative compressors may not be tonal. Assuming four to eight chillers will be used on site, the overall noise level from chillers alone could be around 92 to 99 dB LWA, but the actual noise level will vary depending on the noise from individual chillers. 3.1.2 Packaged Air Conditioning Plant Packaged air conditioning plant may be used to cool the data centre air directly using standard refrigerant cycles. Such plant often includes economiser units or scavenger fans which provide cooling to the data centre air via a heat exchanger. Radiated noise levels from large packaged air-conditioning units can be dominated by the scavenger fans. Banks of scavenger fans on a single air handling unit could have sound power levels of 94 to 96 4 dB LWA . It is often necessary to operate multiple PAC units (5 to 10 units) each with a bank of scavenger fans operating. In that situation, total sound power levels may be in the order of 100 to 106 dB LWA. It may be possible to attenuate noise from scavenger fans through the use of silencers which would reduce the overall sound power level. However this is likely to be a non-standard solution that would need to be pursued through the engineering department of the supplier. 3.1.3 Generators Generators can be containerised or non-containerised.
Containerised generators may have sound power levels or around 98 dB LWA where 1000 kW generators are located in well-designed enclosures. Poorly performing enclosures could have greater sound power levels associated with them.
Noise levels within data centre generator halls are often around 110 dB LAeq (reverberant). The actual noise level will depend on the generator used, the wall lining and whether generators are containerised or unenclosed within the hall. Noise from these rooms can be readily attenuated using rectangular silencers of between 1200 and 2400mm long as well as exhaust silencers and suitable building materials. 3.1.4 Ancillary Plant Ancillary equipment such as pumps are best located inside plantrooms to prevent these items contributing to the noise output. If such equipment is located outdoors it may add to the noise level.
4 This would need to be confirmed by the supplier
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 6
Figure 1: Site Zoning
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 7
Figure 2: Site and Surrounds
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 8
4.0 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS 4.1 Site Visit A site inspection/survey was carried on Thursday 28th February 2019 between 2:00 and 3:00pm. Weather conditions were acceptable with no cloud cover. Winds were gentle breezes with estimated windspeeds of 3.4 to 5.4 m/s. Wind noise in foliage was audible at times and contributed to the background and ambient noise level at some locations. A measurement was carried out at a location that was 6 metres from Mc Cathie Road. The measurement location was to the due north of 44 McCathie Road. Measured noise levels are summarised in Table 1. Table 2: Noise Level Measurement Results Measured level Measurement Measurement dB Noise Source Position Start Duration LAFmax LAeq LA10 LA90 Time minutes MP1 2:09 pm 13:05 85 63 62 45 Regular traffic passbys, wind in m:ss grass and trees, cicadas (almost continuous), distant traffic on SH15a.
The ambient and background noise levels at the measurement location were somewhat elevated during the measurement. This is due to insect noise as well as local vehicle pass-bys on Mc Cathie Road. During the winter months, background noise levels are likely to reduce somewhat as insects will be less active. State Highway 15a carries around 3,700 vehicles per day with around 25% heavy vehicles. Measurements Marshall Day Acoustics has previously carried out in this location show that the night- time noise level varies considerably near the State Highway over the night period due to the variation in truck movement numbers. Appendix C shows an example of noise levels that could occur at 400m from State Highway 15a during the night-time. The overall traffic ambient noise level may be in the order of 40 dB LAeq over the night period with noise levels of between 25 to 35 dB LAeq(15 min) often occurring during lulls in traffic. Background noise levels of between 25 to 30 dB LA90 (15 min) are expected to occur during still nights.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 9
5.0 WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL NOISE RULES 5.1 Noise Rules – Typical Operation The site and adjacent sites are zoned as Rural Production in the Operative Whangarei District Plan5. The area to the north is zoned as Marsden Primary Centre. There are two noise zones within this zone. The District Plan rules that apply to the adjacent Environments are defined in the Noise and Vibration chapter NAV 6.1. The noise rules are contained in Appendix B of this report and are summarised as follows: Noise received within adjacent Rural Production zones
Day time (0700 to 2200 hours): 55 dB LAeq
Night-time (2200 to 0700 hours): 40 dB LAeq, 70 dB LAFmax Noise received within adjacent Marden Primary Centre Noise Zone 2 zones
Day time (0700 to 2200 hours): 55 dB LAeq
Night-time (2200 to 0700 hours): 45 dB LAeq, 70 dB LAFmax The data centre will operate continuously. The night-time noise rules will therefore limit operation. The noise rules are applied at the notional boundary of any dwelling within the Rural Production zone and at the site boundary of the Marsden Primary Centre. A notional boundary is a line 20 metres from the façade of any dwelling, or the site boundary where this is closer to the façade. The ambient and background noise levels on the site set out in Section 4.0 do not suggest that the District Plan noise limits are unreasonably stringent. A variation of the noise limits on the basis of the ambient noise levels is not considered appropriate. 5.2 Noise Rules – Emergency Generator Testing The Whangarei District Plan includes specific noise rules for emergency generator testing. These are summarised in NAV6.14 as follows: The testing of emergency generators is a permitted activity in all Environments if: a. The duration of testing does not exceed 12 hours total per annum; b. Testing occurs between 0900 and 1700 hours only; c. Noise levels do not exceed the following:
i. 60 dB LAeq(15 min) within the relevant boundary assessment location of any Marsden Primary Centre – Town Centre Living, Open Space, Rural Production, Rural Village Residential or Urban Transition or Countryside Environments.
ii. 65 dB LAeq(15 min) within the site boundary of any Business 1, 3, Rural Village Centre, Town Basin, Port Nikau Noise Zone 2, Marsden Primary Centre Noise Zone 2 . iii. … The noise rules do not explicitly apply for emergency operation of the generators. Whether this needs a resource consent / plan change (if it exceeds the zone noise limits) or whether this is covered by other legislation (such as the Civil Defence Act) should be determined by others. If a plan change is proposed to occur it should include allowance for infrequent emergency generator operation at a
5 The Environment is proposed as Rural Production in the proposed Plan Change
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 10
higher noise level than the night-time limit. A noise level of around 45 dB LAeq is provisionally suggested. 5.3 Noise Rules – Construction NAV 6.2 relates to construction. This rule requires construction activities to comply with NZS6803:1999 “Acoustics - Construction Noise”. These are summarised in Appendix D.4 5.4 Noise Duration The Operative Whangarei District Plan references New Zealand environmental acoustic standards NZS 6801:2008 and NZS 6802:2008 as follows: Unless specified otherwise, noise shall be measured in accordance with New Zealand Standard NZS 6801:2008 “Acoustics – Measurement of environmental sound” and assessed in accordance with New Zealand Standard NZS6802:2008 “Acoustics - Environmental Noise.” Section 6.4 of NZS 6802:2008 discusses the duration for which the noise source of interest generates noise. In summary, if a sound is not present all the time, it is likely to cause less annoyance than if it is continuously present. During the daytime, NZS 6802:2008 allows for an adjustment of measured noise by up to 5 dB if a noise source generates noise for short periods. If the duration of noise emissions from a site noise source is less than 5 hours per day, 5 dB can be subtracted from the overall measured noise. The above is only relevant for emergency generator testing which is likely to occur for less than an hour per month. A duration correction adjustment of – 5 dB would be applicable to that source of noise when it occurs during the daytime.
6.0 CALCULATIONS AND ANALYSIS Marshall Day Acoustics has carried out high level calculations to determine what the level of risk would be that an operating data centre would breach the District Plan noise limits. In order to determine this, “scenarios” have been modelled and assessed. These scenarios are as follows: Table 3: Noise Modelling Scenarios
Scen. Details
1 Standard operation No generator operation 6 8 off chillers (total sound power level assumed to be 99 dB LWA) Well attenuated duct terminations Few traffic or truck movements
1b As per Scenario #1 but with 3m high bund around entire perimeter7
6 This is based around 8 chillers operating at 90 dB LWA each. It could also represent a scenario where four noisier chillers operate (e.g. four chillers with a sound power level of 93 dB LWA each). 7 It is assumed that a substantial bund would be constructed that would allow for full screening to the south. Note that the bund may need to overlap at the vehicle entry / exit points if the access is via McCathie Road. See Appendix D for details of the bund used in the calculations.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 11
2 Generator #1 8 Containerised generators in operation (2 off at 98 dB LWA each) 8 off chillers (total sound power level assumed to be 99 dB LWA) Well attenuated duct terminations Few traffic or truck movements
2b As per Scenario #2 but with 3m high bund around entire perimeter
3 Generator #2 Generators in generator hall operating at 110 dB LAeq (reverberant) with well-engineered ventilation system and wall/ceiling sound insulation 8 off chillers (total sound power level assumed to be 99 dB LWA) Well attenuated duct terminations Few traffic or truck movements
3b As per Scenario #2 but with 3m high bund around entire perimeter
6.1 Calculated Noise Levels The following table outlines the results of the calculations for the above scenarios
Table 4: Calculation Results (includes cooling plant at total sound power level of 99 dB LWA)
Sound Pressure Level dB LAeq Noise Limit (dB LAeq)
Scenario
Receiver 1 1b 2 2b 3 3b
Adjacent Receiver Boundaries
79 McCathie Road 42 37 46 40 42 37 40 (notional boundary to east)
50, 58 McCathie Road 43 39 46 41 43 39 40 (notional boundary to south)
44, 34, 32 McCathie Road 41 37 45 40 42 38 40 (Southwest notional boundaries)
Marsden Primary Centre 33 29 39 33 32 28 45 (mixed use area)
Internal Noise Levels (District Plan Noise Limits do not currently apply within the site)
Northern Internal Data Centre 51 37 57 48 51 39 - Boundary
Western Internal Data Centre 49 35 52 41 49 36 - Boundary
8 This assumes that there would be four generators, two of which would operate if required.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 12
7.0 RESULTS SUMMARY The analysis shows the following: Operation (no generators operating)
• Without a noise barrier, it will likely be difficult to achieve the night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq if cooling plant (and other ancillary plant) has a total sound power level of around 96 dB LWA or more. Chillers could be selected to have a total sound power level of less than 96 dB LWA if very quiet chillers are used and there are no more than around 6 to 8 chillers operating. However this level of operation would not leave margin for uncertainty or future expansion.
• It is not expected that this total sound power level (96 dB LWA or below) could be achieved with multiple large PAC units with multiple scavenger fans operating. We would be happy to review any manufacturers data in these units and to reassess as required.
• Given the above, it is considered that there is an appreciable risk that the 40 dB LAeq noise limit would be exceeded at night without a noise bund around the site unless quiet chillers can be reliably “set back” (i.e. operate at a lower noise level) on all nights of the year. It may also be possible to achieve the limit if PAC units can be sought with noise control on the scavenger units to significantly reduce the overall noise emission from the site, however this would be subject to engineering solutions with the equipment provider. • Noise barriers (extensive bunds around the perimeter of the site) appear to be an effective way of reducing noise emissions to the surrounding area. The use of bunds could allow the use of quiet non-tonal chillers on the site while complying with the noise limit. Note that the noise barrier allowed for in our calculations is extensive, 3m high and requires overlap of vehicle exit points (refer Appendix D). The calculations assume that the chillers are located within 4 metres of ground level. However, it is important to note that even with the noise barriers in place, compliance is only marginal with the 40 dB LAeq noise limit. There may be limited opportunity for future expansion, even with the noise barriers in place. • An additional way of reducing noise emissions would be to use the building structure of the data centre to reduce noise emissions to the east and south. This has not been included in the noise model as no building envelopes have been provided. Generator Operation • Housing generators within a well attenuated generator hall will result in lower noise emissions than using containerised generators. The generator hall would likely need to comprise of heavy walls (masonry) with a well-designed roof / ceiling and a carefully designed ventilation system (likely using 1200 to 2400mm long rectangular attenuators). This option is recommended for the site. Ventilation operating should ideally face north. • It is likely that containerised generators or generators in a generator hall will readily comply with the District Plan noise rules for emergency generator testing of 60 dB LAeq(15 min). If a higher noise limit is sought for true “emergency use” of generators as part of the Plan Change, then containerised generators could be considered for the site. However even the use of high effective bunds around the perimeter of the site would not be enough to achieve compliance with the existing night-time noise limit (40 dB LAeq) if containerised generators are used. Section 16 of the RMA may be applicable to this situation, as the provision of an attenuated generator hall may be the “best practicable option” to achieve reasonable noise levels (rather than the use of containerised generators)
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 13
8.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS • Night-time background and ambient noise levels at this site are not significantly elevated. The existing ambient and background noise levels do not support an increase in the noise limit for this site as part of a private plan change. • An analysis of noise from a scenario with eight large chillers operating with a total sound power level of 99 dB LWA suggests that there is appreciable risk that the night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq would be exceeded. To comply with the noise limit would require noise control bunds, selection of quiet cooling plant and engineering control of generator noise emissions. • The following design solution is likely to result in the lowest overall level of noise emission from the site. It is recommended that this form the design of the data centre mechanical plant, if practicable.
o Chiller plant (or similar) with a total sound power level of below 94 dB LWA. This could be perhaps be achieved by six quiet, non-tonal chillers operating each with a night-time sound power level of less than 86 dB LWA each. This would represent well-engineered chiller plant and care would need to be taken in the selection of the plant. o Chiller plant located at ground level o 3-metre high noise bunds around the site including overlaps around vehicle egress points o Plant layout to take advantage of acoustic screening provided by data centre buildings o Generators in masonry generator hall with well-designed ventilation paths (incorporating rectangular silencers) and generator exhaust silencers It is expected that with the above solutions in place, noise emissions from the site could be below 40 dB LAeq with a small factor of safety. This would comply with the existing Whangarei District Plan zone provisions. • It is considered that whilst the inclusion of extensive acoustic measures could make a proposed data centre compliant; the location is likely to have an impact of the acceptable size of the centre and is likely to prevent further expansion for the centre in the future as the initial facility is predicted to be only just compliant (leaving little “budget” for future activity). It is therefore recommended that consideration be given to moving the site or choosing an alternative location. • Moving the data centre to the north of the site would result in lower overall noise emissions to the more sensitive rural production area. Doubling the distance between the data centre plant and the existing dwellings may reduce noise levels by around 8 decibels if there is sufficient soft ground between the site and surrounding dwellings. This would have the following benefits: o Compliance could possibly be achieved without the use of such high bunds o Other forms of cooling plant (e.g. PAC units) may be able to be used on the site with noise barriers in place • The above information is based on a range of assumptions as part of the initial site review. It is recommended that Marshall Day Acoustics be provided with any relevant noise emission data for a preliminary design so that the assumptions within this report can be reviewed. In particular, engineering details of potential cooling plant would be useful in providing more certainty over noise emissions and compliance with noise limits.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 14
APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY Noise A sound that is unwanted by, or distracting to, the receiver. Masking Noise Intentional background noise that is not disturbing, but due to its presence causes other unwanted noises to be less intelligible, noticeable and distracting. Ambient The ambient noise level is the noise level measured in the absence of the intrusive noise or the noise requiring control. Ambient noise levels are frequently measured to determine the situation prior to the addition of a new noise source. Special Audible Distinctive characteristics of a sound which are likely to subjectively cause adverse Characteristics community response at lower levels than a sound without such characteristics. Examples are tonality (e.g. a hum or a whine) and impulsiveness (e.g. bangs or thumps).
SPL or LP Sound Pressure Level A logarithmic ratio of a sound pressure measured at distance, relative to the threshold of hearing (20 µPa RMS) and expressed in decibels.
SWL or LW Sound Power Level A logarithmic ratio of the acoustic power output of a source relative to 10-12 watts and expressed in decibels. Sound power level is calculated from measured sound pressure levels and represents the level of total sound power radiated by a sound source. dB Decibel The unit of sound level. Expressed as a logarithmic ratio of sound pressure P relative to a reference pressure of Pr=20 Pa i.e. dB = 20 x log(P/Pr) dBA The unit of sound level which has its frequency characteristics modified by a filter (A- weighted) so as to more closely approximate the frequency bias of the human ear. A-weighting The process by which noise levels are corrected to account for the non-linear frequency response of the human ear.
LAeq (t) The equivalent continuous (time-averaged) A-weighted sound level. This is commonly referred to as the average noise level. The suffix "t" represents the time period to which the noise level relates, e.g. (8 h) would represent a period of 8 hours, (15 min) would represent a period of 15 minutes and (2200-0700) would represent a measurement time between 10 pm and 7 am.
LA90 (t) The A-weighted noise level equalled or exceeded for 90% of the measurement period. This is commonly referred to as the background noise level. The suffix "t" represents the time period to which the noise level relates, e.g. (8 h) would represent a period of 8 hours, (15 min) would represent a period of 15 minutes and (2200-0700) would represent a measurement time between 10 pm and 7 am.
LA10 (t) The A-weighted noise level equalled or exceeded for 10% of the measurement period. This is commonly referred to as the average maximum noise level. The suffix "t" represents the time period to which the noise level relates, e.g. (8 h) would represent a period of 8 hours, (15 min) would represent a period of 15
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 15
minutes and (2200-0700) would represent a measurement time between 10 pm and 7 am.
LAmax The A-weighted maximum noise level. The highest noise level which occurs during the measurement period.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 16
APPENDIX B WHANGAREI NAV NOISE AND VIBRATION RULES
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 17
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 18
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 19
APPENDIX C EXAMPLE (ONLY) OF POSSIBLE NOISE LEVELS AT 400M FROM SH15A INCLUDES ONLY SH15A NOISE. NOISE FROM LOCAL SOURCES WILL INCREASE AMBIENT LEVELS
20:48:00
18:24:00
16:00:00
13:36:00
11:12:00
08:48:00
40 40 dB LAEQ
Example of Variation in Night-Time Levels (for night-time average noise levelnoiseofaverage Levels night-time Night-Time (for in Variation Example of
Example Rural Highway at 43 dB LAeq24hr (400m from SH15a)from(400m at 43 Example dB LAeq24hr Highway Rural
Example Urban Highway at 43 dB LAeq24hrSH15a)Highway from(400m at Example 43 dB Urban
Time of Day of Time
06:24:00
04:00:00
01:36:00
23:12:00
20:48:00
18:24:00
16:00:00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00 50.00 Sound Pressure Level dB LAeq LAeq dB Level Pressure Sound
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 20
APPENDIX D 3M HIGH BUND (3D AND 2D VIEWS)
SH15a
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 20181204 Marsden Technology Park Initial Information ISSUE.docx 21 ATTACHMENT 6
ENGINEERING OUTCOMES TRAFFIC REPORT
www.reyburnandbryant.co.nz
Engineering Outcomes, Limited 132 Beach Road PO Box 3048, Onerahi Whangarei New Zealand Telephone 09 436 5534 E-mail [email protected] Internet www.e-outcomes.co.nz
PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK PRECINCT MARSDEN, RUAKAKA
ASSESSMENT OF TRAFFIC EFFECTS
Prepared by Dean Scanlen, Engineering Outcomes Ltd 27 June 2019 Traffic Report
Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...... 1
2. OVERALL CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES 1
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL AND EXISTING ROADS ...... 1
4. TRAFFIC ...... 6 4.1 TRAFFIC GENERATION, ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS ...... 6 4.2 TRAFFIC ON EXISTING ROADS ...... 8 4.3 FUTURE INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE ...... 9 4.4 CRASHES ...... 9 5. ASSESSMENT OF TRAFFIC EFFECTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 10
6. APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND INPUTS TO THE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS ...... 12
7. APPENDIX B: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS (SIDRA) SUMMARY OUTPUT 14
FIGURE 1. AN AERIAL PHOTO OF THE PORT MARSDEN HIGHWAY/MCCATHIE ROAD INTERSECTION. PHOTO AND CADASTRAL DATA FROM LINZ. 3 FIGURE 2. AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE MARSDEN POINT ROAD/MCCATHIE ROAD INTERSECTION. PHOTO FROM LINZ. 4
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND A technology park precinct is proposed over 5 lots totaling 44.6 hectares at Marsden, near Ruakaka.
This report is an assessment of the traffic effects of the proposal including measures proposed to mitigate those effects. The precinct is referred to in this report as MTPP.
2. OVERALL CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Overall, for the reasons given in this report, it is concluded that the effects of traffic enabled by the proposed MTPP at Marsden, on the existing road network, will be to slightly bring forward the time at which regular congestion begins to be experienced at the key pressure point – the Port Marsden Highway (SH15)/McCathie Road intersection. However, this effect will be minimal, with congestion expected to be experienced within 11 years (by year 2030) with the MTPP, compared with only 12 years (by year 2031) without the MTPP.
The traffic through the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection will be dominated by expected development of the nearby Marsden City and other activity and development. In fact, the proposal is expected to generate less than 4% of the traffic through the intersection by year 2030.
A left-turn taper might be required at the Marsden Point Road/McCathie Road intersection as a result of development enabled by the proposal, but that is already warranted and a complying taper can be constructed entirely within road reserve.
It would also be desirable to address a minor sight distance issue - the complying sightline from the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection, towards the northeast, while clear, crosses part of the site. This would be addressed either with a suitable covenant over the land between the sightline and existing boundary or its vesting as road.
Overall, traffic effects should not be an impediment to the proposed MTPP.
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL AND EXISTING ROADS The proposal is the re-zoning of 44.6 hectares of land in a contiguous area over the 5 allotments shaded red on the map on the title page of this report. The site is at the eastern corner of the intersection of Port Marsden Highway (part of SH15) and McCathie Road near Ruakaka. The new zone would permit industrial development and, at least initially, is intended to enable the establishment of a data centre, technology park and associated services and infrastructure. The entire area is currently zoned Rural Production in the Whangarei District Plan.
Access to the entire site is proposed to lead only onto McCathie Road at two different crossing points as also shown on the map on the title page.
McCathie Road is a sealed rural road with one lane in each direction. It connects to Port Marsden Highway at its north-western end and Marsden Point Road at its south-eastern end. McCathie Road has the status of collector road in the Whangarei District Plan.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 1 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
McCathie Road intersects with the south-eastern side of Port Marsden Highway in a stop-controlled at-grade tee intersection. It includes a right-turn bay on Port Marsden Highway (for right-turns into McCathie Road) and informal (unmarked) widening for left turns into McCathie Road. The visibility from this intersection is excellent along all sightline vectors, although that to the northeast, from the intersection limit lines, crosses private land - part of the subject site.
Another side road – One Tree Point Road, connects to the other (north-western) side of Port Marsden Highway 32 metres northeast of the McCathie Road intersection. One Tree Point Road is also is a sealed rural road with one lane in each direction and with the status of collector road in the Whangarei District Plan. There is a left-turn lane for vehicles turning into One Tree Point Road from the southwest (see photo 2). Widening of Port Marsden Highway opposite the intersection is approximately equivalent to the component of NZTA’s “Diagram E” for right-turns1.
Figure 1 is an annotated aerial photo of the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road/One Tree Point Road intersection.
McCathie Road intersects with Marsden Point Road in a give-way controlled at-grade tee intersection. It includes a right-turn bay on Marsden Point Road but no widening for left turns into McCathie Road. Marsden Point Road also has the status of collector road in the Whangarei District Plan.
Port Marsden Highway is a sealed rural road with one lane in each direction plus short additional lanes at some intersections (including that with McCathie Road and One Tree Point Roads as already described). It links SH 1N to the port and oil refinery at Marsden Point and development along several side roads including a large residential and commercial area (“Marsden Cove”) on Marsden Bay Drive and the LVL mill on Rama Road.
Speed limits are 100 km/hr on all roads along the site frontage and also on this first few kilometres of One Tree Point Road. The speed limit on Marsden Point Road through its intersection with McCathie Road is 70 km/hr.
Sight distances in relation to the existing, and proposed new, intersection and connection locations are all excellent apart from the one minor exception already described (and which can be addressed by way of a covenant or the vesting of additional land as described).
1 Planning Policy Manual, August 2007, Appendix 5B. Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 2 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Figure 1. An aerial photo of the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection. Photo and cadastral data from LINZ.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 3 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Figure 2. An aerial view of the Marsden Point Road/McCathie Road intersection. Photo from LINZ.
The land between the eastern end of McCathie Road and the Ruakaka River, which is visible at the bottom left of Figure 2, is all road-reserve.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 4 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Photo 1. McCathie Road looking northwest towards Port Marsden Highway. The green grassed area at upper right is part of the Marsden City site and the grey station wagon is turning into One Tree Point Road.
Photo 2. Port Marsden Highway looking northeast towards McCathie Road (at centre-right behind the grey hatchback) and One Tree Point Road (at centre left). Note the additional lanes for vehicles turning into the side roads.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 5 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
4. TRAFFIC Unless other stated, all vehicle movements reported here are one-way movements. In relation to the proposal, half of the movements are arrivals and the other half are departures.
4.1 Traffic Generation, Origins and Destinations Traffic generation enabled in the subject area, by the MTPP, has been estimated by investigating a recent traffic count on an existing road – Union East Street in Whangarei. Union East Street is a no exit road with a virtually fully developed, if not fully developed, catchment that contains only business and industrial activity (and no known residences). Union East Street is the only road in Whangarei District that is considered representative of the development that the MTPP will enable over the subject area, and on which the traffic has recently been counted.
The catchment of Union East Street includes 26 developed lots of average area 0.7ha and total GFA of a little under 40,000 sq.m2. That is, building coverage of 22%.
Development in the catchment of Union East Street generated 1,730 vehicle movements on weekdays in March 2018, of which an average of 154 occurred during the afternoon peak hour (4 to 5pm) and an average of 142 occurred during the morning peak hour (7 to 8am). That is, a little under 0.4 movements per 100 sq.m GFA during the afternoon peak hour and 0.36 movements per 100 sq.m GFA during the morning peak hour.
These rates are somewhat lower than typical rates for industrial development as derived from general literature and databases3. However, none of those use data from Whangarei district. The Union East Street data is likely to be a lot more representative of traffic from the subject area. It is used for this evaluation, but with an additional factor of safety. The rates used in the analysis are 0.45 movements per 100 sq.m GFA during the afternoon peak hour and 0.40 movements per 100 sq.m GFA during the morning peak hour
The Whangarei District Plan does not specify a permitted traffic generation limit in the Rural Production zone. It does specify that any commercial or industrial activity is a discretionary activity. This does not preclude consent applications being lodged for such activities, without the MTPP, but activities that require consent cannot be considered as part of the permitted baseline or existing environment. As such, it is reasonable and conservative to expect traffic from the subject area, prior to the re-zoning, to be only a small fraction of what the MTPP will enable.
Modern industrial areas typically develop with building coverage in the range 30 to 40% and coverage of 35% is assumed. This is likely to be conservative because it is not certain that the proposed re-zoning would permit coverage at this level. Coverage of 35% would result in a total GFA of a little more than 150,000 square metres.
On this basis, it is estimated that the proposal will enable the generation of an additional 620 movements during an average weekday morning peak hour and nearly 700 movements during an average weekday afternoon peak hour.
2 Obtained from aerial photography assuming all buildings are single-story. Cadastral data is from LINZ. 3 Including the NZ Trips and Parking database. Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 6 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
The origins and destinations of this traffic can be estimated using a rudimentary gravity model. A large proportion of the movements will be by staff travelling between the subject area and their homes. There are large residential areas in both directions. Those to the east and south, including all of Ruakaka, Marsden Cove and Waipu, would mostly use the eastern part of McCathie Road and are currently larger than those at One Tree Point.
However, the site is highly likely to draw some staff from Whangarei, which is within commuting distance for many people. Furthermore, the Whangarei District Plan will enable a very large residential area at Marsden City, there is a large area of undeveloped land zoned residential and future residential at One Tree Point and a large number of undeveloped lots at the Marsden Cove canal development, which will eventually link to One Tree Point Road.
Considering these factors, it is conservatively estimated that 65% of traffic enabled by the MTPP will travel to or from Port Marsden Highway, with the other 35% travelling to or from Marsden Point Road.
Video monitoring has been carried out of the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection during the two peak commuter periods on two recent weekdays. This showed that most traffic, on both side roads, travels to and from the southwest (that is, mostly to/from SH1N) and that there is a significant movement across the highway between the side roads. Only a small proportion travels to and from the northeast. Details of the measured proportions of the origins and destinations are given in Appendix A.
With the ongoing development of Marsden City and residential land at One Tree Point, the proportions of traffic that travel in the various directions are likely to alter somewhat. In particular, the proportion of movements across the highway is likely to decrease slightly, although the quantum of those movements will still increase significantly. Adjustments, albeit small, have been made to the proportions to anticipate this.
Another important factor is the growth in traffic. Whangarei District Council’s 2014 growth model predicts district-wide annual average growth close to 1% per annum for the medium-growth scenario. Growth in the Ruakaka/One Tree Point area has generally not been higher than the district average, so 1% per annum is used for this area (including the subject area and Marsden City). Details of the effects of this is also shown in Appendix A.
A data centre is likely to be one of the first, if not the first, development within the area. A similar data centre at Toowoomba, Australia, has a gross floor area (GFA) of 8,800 square metres. Such would be less than 6% of the total GFA once the MTPP is fully developed. As such, even if the data centre is developed in less than 6 years, the assumption about growth remains appropriate provided that the MTPP does not cause road or intersection capacity to be reached within 6 years (which is, indeed, the case as shown later).
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 7 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
4.2 Traffic on Existing Roads The traffic on McCathie Road was last counted by the council in April 2007, when a 7-day average of 640 movements per day was counted. The council’s estimate for 2018 is 735 movements per day, which is considered reasonable.
Traffic on this part of Port Marsden Highway is not counted regularly4, so the video monitoring provides the most accurate data. This found, among other things, that the traffic is highly tidal in nature, especially in the afternoon when more than 80% of the through (non-turning) traffic on Port Marsden Highway was southwest-bound. Details of this component of the monitoring are given in Appendix A.
The traffic on Marsden Point Road is counted regularly by the council, although not near McCathie Road. Counts carried out in 2018 yielded 3,530 movements per day south of Ruakaka Beach Road (mid-February) and 2,750 movements per day north of Sime Road (September) – both are averages over 7 days. Previous surveys of turning traffic at Peter Snell Road, which is only 150 metres north of McCathie Road, indicate somewhat higher traffic than that north of Sime Road, although at least some of the additional traffic is likely to use McCathie Road. On this basis, non-turning traffic on Marsden Point Road, through the McCathie Road intersection, is estimated at 3,000 movements per day.
The traffic on One Tree Point Road is also counted regularly by the council. A count near the southern end of the road in September 2018 south of McEwan and Takahiwai Roads, yielded 2,255 movements per day when averaged over 7 days, 2,350 when averaged over weekdays, of which 9.2% occurred during both morning and afternoon peak hours).
Traffic on all roads will increase with other developments in the area, especially Marsden City. The district plan has special provisions for the “Marsden Primary Centre” which is intended to control the development of the Marsden City area. It specifies a “spatial budget” for various land uses. The quantum of each of those, and the estimated traffic generation from them at full development, is as follows (GFA = Gross Floor Area, vmpd = vehicle movements per day as an annual weekday average): Retail - 60,000 sq.m GFA: 40,000 to 45,000 vmpd; Commercial - 82,000 sq.m GFA: 10,000 to 12,000 vmpd if mostly offices; Industry - 105 hectares: 15,000 to 16,000 vmpd if developed on the same basis as that assumed for the subject area5; Education - 19 hectares: say 4,000 vmpd; Community facilities – 4 hectares: say 500 vmpd; and Rural – 9 ha: say 200 vmpd.
Because of this development mix, some of this traffic will remain within the Marsden City area or travel to and from One Tree Point (and Marsden Cove when that is linked to One Tree Point Road), so will not travel through the Port Marsden Highway intersection. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that two-thirds of all traffic generated within Marsden City will travel through the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road/One Tree Point Road intersection.
4 The only count station is northeast of the Marsden Point Road intersection. 5 35% site coverage, 4.4 vmpd per 100 sq.m GFA as from the Union East St catchment. Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 8 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
The proportional impact of the MTPP reduces as the assumed proportion of all Marsden City traffic, that travels through the Port Marsden Highway intersection, increases. The assumed proportion of two-thirds is likely to be towards the low end of the likely range. The analysis is also not particularly sensitive to that proportion, so it is not necessary to carry out a more detailed analysis to estimate it.
4.3 Future Intersection Performance The future performance of the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road/One Tree Point Road intersection has been determined by analysing the intersection using SIDRA intersection software. Inputs include a combination of observations from the video monitoring, existing traffic counts, traffic generation estimates associated with known development areas (especially the subject site and Marsden City) and assumed future growth as already described.
To ensure the effect of traffic crossing the highway is been properly accounted for, the intersection has been analysed as a short network of two stop-controlled tee intersections.
The traffic on the side roads, and across the highway, has been estimated as a percentage of the average weekly counts on each road based on the monitoring, not the count from the monitoring itself (which was only over a short period and intended primarily to inform the percentage origins and destinations). Despite the small sample, the traffic on Port Marsden Highway has been taken directly from the monitoring because the single count station on this part of Port Marsden Highway is not likely to represent the traffic at this location with sufficient accuracy.
The intersection is assumed to reach capacity when the average delay for the critical movement reaches 60 seconds (1 minute). With the assumptions described, the analysis found that this would occur in year 2031 without the MTPP and year 2030 with it.
After each run of each network, the output was checked to ensure the conservation of flows. This is easy to check in this case, because there are no other entry points between the side roads through which traffic might be gained and/or lost. Detailed assumptions are given in Appendix A and the outputs from SIDRA are given in Appendix B.
4.4 Crashes The CAS database, of crashes reported to the Police, has been searched on the intersections at each end of McCathie Road, plus that of One Tree Point Road with Port Marsden Highway, for the period since the start of 2014.
Only one turning crash has been reported at those intersections. It involved two vehicles turning at the McCathie Road/Marsden Point Road intersection at the same time and resulted only in damage to vehicles. No other crashes have been reported at that intersection.
The only reported crashes at the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road intersection involved single vehicles losing control, the more serious of which might have involved a vehicle intending to turn left into McCathie Road, although the occupants of the vehicle stated that they could not recall the crash.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 9 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Four crashes have been reported at the Port Marsden Highway/One Tree Point Road intersection. All were single-vehicle crashes, three of which involved southbound vehicles missing the intersection and driving straight through it (without colliding with other vehicles). None resulted in injuries to vehicle occupants.
A Northland region-wide search has also been carried out of crashes involving vehicles crossing a road at rural double-tee intersections (type “HA” in CAS). A number of such crashes have been reported, but three occurred at roundabouts and all except one of the others occurred at an intersection with no offset. The only intersection with an offset between the side roads only has a 3 metre offset – not enough to eliminate the potential for movements across the priority route without at least a significant reduction in speed. In two of the crashes at intersections without offsets, visibility was also poor.
There are numerous rural right-left configuration crossroads in the Northland region, not all of which have additional short lanes like those at the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road/One Tree Point Road intersection. The complete absence of recent historic type “HA” crashes on those intersections is a strong indication that this type of intersection is performing well within acceptable levels of risk.
5. ASSESSMENT OF TRAFFIC EFFECTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES The key traffic issue with the proposal is considered to be the additional traffic it will generate through the Port Marsden Highway/McCathie Road/One Tree Point Road intersection, especially potential congestion caused by additional movements across the highway (which initially require a right turn). The modelling of the intersection in SIDRA indicates the proposal will have only minimal effect on the intersection – it is expected to bring forward by only 1 year the future time at which capacity issues will be regularly experienced. Such issues are currently expected to be experienced within 12 years without the MTPP and 11 years with it.
The critical movement is right-turn exits from the side roads. Most of those from McCathie Road occur as part of a crossing movement across the highway, whereas right turns from One Tree Point Road predominantly continue past McCathie Road. There is an additional lane in the centre of Port Marsden Highway in which vehicles crossing from McCathie Road can wait, before they turn into One Tree Point Road (see Figure 1) As such, this analysis is somewhat conservative, but the results are also not sensitive to factors like this.
The traffic from Marsden City, plus that from other activities and new developments, will always continue to dominate the traffic through the Port Marsden Highway intersection. In fact, in year 2030, the proposed MTPP is expected to generate less than 4% of the traffic through that intersection.
There is no recent history of two-vehicle crashes at the intersection. Indeed none has recently been reported at any similar, often somewhat inferior, intersections elsewhere in Northland. As such, the intersection is very unlikely to warrant upgrading for safety reasons prior to its upgrading becoming necessary for capacity reasons.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 10 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
A left-turn lane is already warranted on Marsden Point Road south of its intersection with McCathie Road6. The proposal will increase the frequency of those turns, although that will not be the dominant movement and no crashes have been reported involving left turns into McCathie Road since at least the start of 2014. Even so, a left-turn taper, or lane, might eventually be required in this location in conjunction with the development of some of the subject area. All of the land in that location is in road reserve, so this is not a constraint to the granting of the MTPP.
All other turns through the intersections are expected to have adequate capacity well beyond those of the critical right-turn exits.
At the site entrances themselves, there will be adequate capacity for all turns for several decades. If significant upgrading is even necessary, there is very likely to be adequate space within the existing road reserve and the crossings can also be configured such that additional land, on the site side of the road, can be made available if this is ever necessary.
The capacity of the midblock section of McCathie Road will remain at an acceptable level. The traffic on the road is not expected to increase to more than some 5,000 movements per day as a result of development the MTPP will enable. Two-lane rural roads have midblock capacities significantly greater than this. The proposal is not expected to have a significant effect on other roads, especially when compared with the expected effect of Marsden City.
Overall, traffic effects should not be an impediment to the proposed MTPP.
6 When the warrants in Whangarei District Council’s Environmental Engineering Standards, section 3.4.10.3, are applied. Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 11 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
6. APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND INPUTS TO THE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS This table shows the proportions of all turns through the intersections as obtained from the monitoring. EntryR is a right-turn into the side road, exitR is a right- turn out of the side road and so on. SH15 "Through" McCathie Rd turning One Tree Point Rd turning (vmph) Exit to Exit to SW Time EntryR EntryL ExitR ExitL EntryR EntryL ExitR ExitL NE Bound OTP Rd McCathie Rd Bound 19 March 2019 (afternoon) % of OTP Rd traffic: 9% 2% 48% 34% 0% 8% % of McC Rd traffic: 28% 10% 0% 25% 20% 17% 60 278
22 March 2019 (morning) % of OTP Rd traffic: 11% 1% 26% 49% 0% 13% % of McC Rd traffic: 35% 2% 3% 19% 19% 22% 146 66
This table, and those on the following page, show the estimated frequencies of movements approaching each leg during the afternoon peak hour, which is generally busier than the morning peak hour. SH15 is Port Marsden Highway. The SH15 legs are southwest of McCathie Road and northeast of One Tree Point Road, respectively. On those legs, L and R are left and right turns into the requisite side road in each case. The traffic for each side road under “Across” is that which crosses SH15 into the other side road. Existing Traffic (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd Totals L R Through L R Across L R Through L R Across Currently 614 102 29 60 26 0 19 10 3 278 0 71 16 11 years 682 113 32 67 28 0 22 11 4 309 0 79 18 12 years 688 114 32 67 29 0 22 11 4 311 0 80 18
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 12 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Existing Traffic (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd Totals L R Through L R Across L R Through L R Across Currently 614 102 29 60 26 0 19 10 3 278 0 71 16 11 years 682 113 32 67 28 0 22 11 4 309 0 79 18 12 years 688 114 32 67 29 0 22 11 4 311 0 80 18
Marsden City Traffic (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd Totals L (OTP Rd)R (McC Rd)Through L R Through L R Through L R Through Full development 5225 11 years 575 287 0 0 0 0 46 0 6 0 0 195 40 12 years 627 314 0 0 0 0 50 0 6 0 0 213 44
Tech Park Traffic (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd Totals L R Through L R Through L R Through L R Through Full development 450 0 135 0 113 5 90 7 0 0 0 0 99 11 years 44 0 13 0 11 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 10 12 years 48 0 14 0 12 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 11
All Traffic With Tech Park (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd L R Through L R Through L R Through L R Through 11 years 400 45 67 39 0 76 12 9 309 0 274 68
All Traffic Without Tech Park (vmph) SH15 Southwest McCathie Rd SH15 Northeast One Tree Pt Rd L R Through L R Through L R Through L R Through 12 years 427 32 67 29 0 72 11 10 311 0 293 62
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 13 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
7. APPENDIX B: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS (SIDRA) SUMMARY OUTPUT
This diagram shows the network configuration that defines the offset tee-intersection:
The route that runs from left to right is the Port Marsden Highway (SH15). “McC” is McCathie Road, “OTP” is One Tree Point Road.
The summary output from SIDRA is given on the following two sheets. The summary with the MTPP is for year 2030 and that without is for year 2031. Some of the demand flows appear higher without the MTPP, but this is not in fact the case - this apparent discrepancy is explained by the high level of growth in the quantum of traffic from Marsden City.
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 14 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 15 27 June 2019
Traffic Report
Proposed Technology Park Precinct, McCathie Rd, Marsden, Ruakaka Page 16 27 June 2019
Submission #252
From: Selwyn and Mira Norris To: Mail Room Subject: Submission to Plan changes Date: Wednesday, 3 July 2019 3:43:51 PM
Whangarei District Council Plan Change;
The plans concerned; Earth works: Maungatapere and Otaika Plan; Sites of Significants Plan 100; Minerals 82 A & B, 88 A-J, 109, 115, 136, 143, 144, 145, 147 & 148 being District Plan Change Urban Plan change-Rural Plan change Want amendments to all the above provisions Reasons of concern: Cultural Values and Identity of Historical Landscape values, discussion to include the protection of the narrative from a cultural perspective from Tangata whenua.
I would like the council to HOLD until an informed discussion has been made with all Tangata Whenua, as the process Council is using (Hand picked Maori named Te Huinga) does not show Good will in accordance with Sec 6 Local Govt Act 2002 therefore is not fit for purpose. The Te Huinga group does not have representation mandated from "Te Parawhau” of Titahi-Wharepaea- Tikorangi- Otaika-Toe Toe- Raumanga- Maunu- Pukenui- Portland- Otara- Maungakaramea- Hihiaua- Onemama- Takatouhaua- Waiharahia-Takawini-Hora Hora-Whero Whero- Opau- Kaiwaka- Tarewa which includes a huge area of the Whangarei District Councils landscape encompasses.
I would like to speak at the public hearing
1. TANGATA WHENUA Mira Norris I am Te Parawhau ki Tai. my email is [email protected]
2. CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT We have worked well together with WDC before Te Huinga setup to develop what we believed was a strong working relationship with Whangarei District Council. Now we are out the back door with new Plan Changes that will change our way of living in our communities. 3. EFFECTS / IMPACTS We have articulated our concerns about the proposal and need a good faith arrangement to work together to understand and address them.
Submission #253
From: MERV WILLIAMS To: Mail Room Subject: Plan change submission Date: Wednesday, 3 July 2019 3:44:18 PM
Plan change 88
My submission is that the Hihiaua Cultural Centre Trust should be allowed to develop a full Cultural Centre on the Open Space at Lower Dent St / Herekino St.
This project has been developed over the past 20 plus years and has received support from continuing Councils.
I wish to be heard in support of this submission
Submitter
Mervyn Rhys Williams as Trustee for Hihiaua Cultural Centre Trust [email protected]
P O Box 1794
Whangarei 0140
021687548 Submission #254
WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan District Plan Changes: Urban and Services All correspondence to the District Plan Department Submissions must be received by: 03 July 2019, 4 p.m.
Full name (Please print clearly) Outboard Boating Club of Northland (Inc) c/- Stephen L Westgate Resource Management Consultant ------
Postal address 290 Beach Road Onerahi Whangarei 0110
Telephone no 09-4360335
Email [email protected]
I could/could not **gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission I am/am not** directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that: a adversely affects the environment; and b does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade competition Delete the entire paragraph if you could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission ** Select one
The specific provisions of the Plan Change that my submission relates to are The provisions of Transport Chapter TRA relating to landscaping requirements of parking areas. In particular, Rules TRA-10, -11, -12 and – 13.
I support/oppose/seek amendment to the specific provision listed above. (delete what’s not applicable)
My submission is Meeting the proposed landscaping and tree planting requirements will significantly reduce the availability of parking spaces for vehicles and boat trailers which is a core function of the Outboard Boating Club. Currently at peak times, the demand by OBC members for secure parking is not met and this situation can only worsen if further parking spaces are lost. There is existing landscaping that should be adequate. Vehicles with tow bars and boat trailers are not electric vehicles and do not have a need for a charging station. Charging stations could be available at the nearby petrol station and shopping centre, not at a recreational facility such as the OBC site. It would be an unreasonable charge on its membership to expect the OBC to apply for a resource consent to not install a charging station.
1 My reasons are (attach additional pages if required) The OBC site at Parua Bay has some green spaces and trees planted alongside an internal road boundary. TRA-R10 would require an additional 2 metre wide planted strip along the road boundary. Not only would this result in the loss of several parking spaces, it would also require ongoing maintenance to control weeds and to ensure that plants did not exceed a height of 1.15 metres but achieved at least 0.9 metre!
TRA-R11 would require that 10% of the parking area should be landscaped. It is not clear whether this is additional to the road boundary landscaping requirement, or whether it might include the lawn area immediately behind the beach. Maintaining mown lawn areas for volunteer groups is relatively straightforward. Maintaining planted areas with regimes involving planting, pruning, weeding, etc. is a different and more onerous issue.
TRA-R12 Tree Planting appears to be overly prescriptive. Would a nursery guarantee that a tree will comply with: “a. A tree species with a minimum height of 4m and minimum canopy shade coverage of 30m2 at 20 years. b. A root area with a minimum area of 9m2 and a minimum dimension of 3m and minimum depth of 1m”? How is the root area and depth to be measured? There is a line of trees alongside the outer boundary with the internal road. Is it required to plant another line of trees inside the fenceline? There are some trees on the site. If they don’t meet the projected size requirements, should they be removed? The OBC accepts that some form of landscaping of parking areas should be encouraged but not as compulsorily prescriptive as proposed.
Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. TRA-R13 requires that: P Where: 1. Any parking area where 50 or more car parking spaces are required by Appendix 1 provides at least 1 electric vehicle charging station per every 50 required car parking spaces. The OBC provides parking for vehicles with tow bars and boat trailers. It would be unusual, possibly unique, for an electric vehicle to be fitted with a tow bar and to be used to tow a boat.
State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can be dealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)
Active Sport and Recreation areas should be excluded from the prescriptive landscaping and tree planting requirements of TRA-10, -11 and -12; and from the electric vehicle charging station requirements of TRA-R13.
I wish to be heard in support of my submission No Yes ✓
If others make a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them at a hearing.
No Yes ✓ Signature of submitter or authorised agent S L Westgate (for Outboard Boating Club of Northland (Inc) Date 3 July 2019 2 A signature is not required if you make your submission by electronic means
3 Submission #255